Disposed

Dr. Neelima Sachan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC26 Oct 2023WRIA/17928/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition seeking pensionary benefits for a retired Ayurvedic doctor. Relying on the Apex Court's decision in Prem Singh and a prior High Court order, the Court directed the respondent to treat the petitioner's pre-2005 ad hoc service as qualifying service for pension calculation.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.1 to consider the petitioner's claim for pensionary benefits by treating services rendered prior to 2005 as qualifying service and to pass a reasoned order within three mont

Dr. Neelima Sachan Vs State of U.P. and 2… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:203814

¶2

Court No. - 34

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17928 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Dr. Neelima Sachan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Raghwendra Prasad Mishra,Avneesh Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard Sri R.P. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

¶7

Petitioner who was posted in Government Ayurvedic Hospital, Ghatampur, Kanpur Nagar and retired from service on 30.06.2022, has not been accorded his pensionary benefits. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that he was initially appointed in the year 1988 and his services were on ad hoc basis, but later on he has come to be regularized in the year 2005.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the latest judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Prem Singh and others Vs. State of U.P. and others (2019) 10 SCC 516 in which it has been held that services earlier rendered in temporary/ad hoc capacity or even as work-charged, would be counted towards qualifying service for pension. Thus, the petitioner claims that his service period prior to regularization deserves to be counted towards pension. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further relied upon the judgment of this Court in Writ-A No.14203 of 2019 filed by one Dr. Om Prakash and another, who were also medical officers working in the Ayurvedic College, which was disposed of by this Court vide judgment and order dated 17.09.2019.

¶9

Learned Standing Counsel does not dispute the above factual and legal position.

¶10

In view of the above, this writ petition also stands disposed of with a direction to respondent no.1 to consider the claim of the petitioner for pensionary benefits by treating

¶11

earlier services rendered by the petitioner prior to 2005 as a qualifying service for the purposes of pension in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Prem Singh and others ( supra ) and the judgment of this Court in Writ-A No.14203 of 2019. An appropriate decision shall also be taken by the authorities with due application of mind by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of three months from the date of production of copy of this order.

¶12

Order Date :- 26.10.2023 Deepika

¶13

Digitally signed by :- DEEPIKA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dr. Neelima Sachan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Neelima Sachan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Shobha Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Mahesh Kumar Baghel Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sri Krishna Rathor Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Dr. Kumar Pal Singh Vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 3 Others

Gopal Chauhan Vs the State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mamta Verma Vs Secretary Uttar Pradesh Sahakari Sansthan Sewa Mandal and 2 Others