Daily wager sought counting of pre-regularization service as qualifying service for pension. Court disposed of the petition in terms of Harbans Lal and Babunji Bhagat, directing respondents to reckon pre-regularization daily wage service for pensionary benefits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CWP-11375-2023
- 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
258
CWP-11375-2023 Date of decision: 10.12.2024
Phool Pati
....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and Others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY
Present:Mr. Shubham Kashyap, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Tapan Kumar, DAG, Haryana.
********* AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)
HAMANT 2024.12.17 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-11375-2023 - 2 - Despite this Court having settled the matter in Harbans Lal vs. State of Punjab & Ors , CWP No. 2371 of 2010, decided on 31-08-2010, against which SLP was also dismissed , the service rendered by her prior to regularization has not been taken into account for the purpose of pension , relevant paras whereof read thus :-
“ 9. Mr. Shalender Mohan, Advocate for the petitioner has further argued that this issue has been considered in a number of judgments while interpreting Rule 3.17 A of the CSR Vol.2. Reference can be made to the judgments of this Court in case of Kashmir Chand v. Punjab State Electricity Board and others, 2005(4) S.C.T 298 : 2005(4) RSJ 581 and Ram Dia and others v. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and another, 2005(4) RSJ 689, Hari Chand v. Bhakra Beas Management Board and others, 2005(2) S.C.T. 95 : 2005(2) RSJ 373 and Balbir Singh v. State of Haryana and others, 2004(3) S.C.T. 698 : 2004(4) RSJ 71. Full Bench while dealing with a similar controversy in the case of Kesar Chand v. State of Punjab, 1988(2) PLR 223 has held as under :-
"Once the services of a work-charged employee have been regularized, there appears to be hardly any logic to deprive him of the pensionary benefits as are available to other public servants under Rule 3.17 of the Rules. Equal protection of laws must mean the protection of equal laws for all persons similarly situated. Article 14 strikes at arbitrariness because a provision which is arbitrary involves the negation of equality. Even the temporary or officiating service under the State Government has to be reckoned for determining the qualifying service. It looks to be illogical that the period of service spent by an employee in a work-charged established before his regularisation has not been taken into consideration for determining the qualifying service. The classification which is sought to be made among Government servants who are eligible for pension and those who started as work-charged employees and their services regularised subsequently, and the others is not based on any intelligible criteria and, therefore, is not sustainable at law. After the services of a work charged employee have been regularized, he is a public servant like any other servant. To deprive him of the pension is not only unjust and inequitable but is hit by the vice of arbitrariness and for these reasons the provisions of sub rule (ii) of Rule 3.17 of the Rules have to be struck down being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution."
HAMANT 2024.12.17 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-11375-2023
- 3 -
Singh (supra). A conjoint reading of the rules, quoted above and the observations of the Full Bench would reveal that it is by now well established that period of service rendered on daily wage/work charges prior to regularisation of services is liable to be counted for the purposes of gratuity and pension."
"There is another aspect of the matter. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Vansant Gangaramsa Chandan v. State of Maharashtra, 1996(4) SCT 403 : JT 1996 (Supp.) SC 544, has considered clause 23 of Chapter VI of a Pension Scheme of the Hyderabad Agricultural Committee, which is as under :-
"4. Clause 23 of Chapter VI in the scheme reads as under : "Qualifying service of a Market Committee employee shall commence from the date he takes charge of the post to which he is first appointed or from the date the employer started deducting the P.F. contribution for the employee which ever later."
It was held that the clauses of the Scheme have to be read by keeping in view the fact that pension is not a bounty of the State and it is earned by employees after rendering long service to fall back upon after their retirement. The same cannot be arbitrarily denied. The clause was subjected to the principle of 'reading down' a well known tool of interpretation to sustain the constitutionality of a statutory provision and accordingly it was read down to mean that the qualifying service could commence either from the date of taking charge of the post to which the employee was first appointed or from the date he started contributing to the Contributory Provident Fund whichever was earlier. The ratio of the above mentioned
HAMANT 2024.12.17 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-11375-2023
- 4 -
judgment would apply to the facts of the instant case, inasmuch as, the provision made in clause 6(6) of the 1992 Scheme has to be read down to mean that qualifying service would commence from the date of continuous appointment, which is 17.8.1965 in the present case, or from an earlier date if the employer had started contributing to the Contributory Provident Fund whichever is earlier. Therefore, the petitioner would be entitled to count her service with effect from the date of her appointment and approval i.e. 17.8.1965."
xxx xxx xxxx
HAMANT 2024.12.17 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-11375-2023
- 5 -
1.1.2004. The new Re-structured Defined Contribution Pension Scheme (Annexure P-1) has been introduced for the new entrants in the Punjab Government Service w.e.f. 01.01.2004, will not be applicable to the petitioner. The amendment made vide Annexure P-2 amending the Punjab Civil Services Rules, cannot be further amended by issuing clarification/instructions dated 30.5.2008 (Annexure P-3). The petitioner will continue to be governed by the GPF Scheme and is held entitled to receive pensionary benefits as applicable to the employees recruited in the Punjab Govt. Services prior to 1.1.2004.
Petition allowed.”
Court ruled in favor of a Class IV employee and directed the respondents to recognize the service provided as a Daily Wage Cook from May 13, 1995, to October 15, 2010, as qualifying service for pensionary and retiral benefits . Relevant paras where of read thus:
“5. A bare perusal of the aforesaid provision shows that the same is explicit and there is no ambiguity. The service is not required to be rendered in the same cadre to be covered under 3.17 Rule. The word used is 'service' and not 'cadre'. Moreover, Division Bench in Harbans Lal's case (supra) explained the import of the Rule and held as under :-
“....We come to the conclusion that the petitioners' initiate date of appointment after regularization will be the date on which employee takes charge of the post. Once the entire service of a daily wager is to be counted as qualifying service then his date of appointment will relegate back to his initial date of appointment i.e. 1988 and he cannot be ousted from pension scheme by applying
HAMANT 2024.12.17 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and 1 CWP-14728-2018, decided on 01.02.2023 integrity of this document
CWP-11375-2023
- 6 -
the date of regularization i.e. 28.3.2005 which is evidently after the new scheme or new restructured defined Contribution Pension Scheme came into force w.e.f. 1.1.2004.”
Court finds that the case of the petitioner would be fully covered therein. Consequently, the present writ petition is allowed.
| (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE |
||
|---|---|---|
| 10.12.2024 | ||
| Hemant | ||
| Whether speaking/reasoned | : Yes / No |
|
| Whether reportable | : Yes / No |
HAMANT 2024.12.17 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 issue framed by the court
Whether daily wage service rendered prior to regularization counts as qualifying service for pension and retirement benefits.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Harbans Lal vs. State of Punjab & OrsRelied on¶2
CWP No. 2371 of 2010, decided on 31-08-2010
Babunji Bhagat vs. State of Punjab and OthersRelied on¶3
CWP-14728-2018, decided on 01.02.2023
Phool Pati
State of Haryana and Others
Aman Chaudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
