The court issued a direction to the 2nd respondent to forward the petitioners' pension application to the Government within two weeks for consideration within two months.
Directed the 2nd respondent to forward the petitioners' application to the 1st respondent within two weeks for consideration within two months.
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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH
W.P.NO.32208 OF 2011
O R D E R
Heard both the counsel.
2. The case of the petitioners, as stated in the writ affidavit, is that the 1st respondent – Government, in the year 1979 established the Integrated Milk Project, with an intention to procure milk, tone them and to sell in the market. The petitioners were recruited in the erstwhile Integrated Milk Project during the years 1969, 1971, 1972 and 1997 as Filed Assistants, Helpers and Supervisors. There is no dispute that all the petitioners are Government employees, who have been working in Integrated Milk Project. While so, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.14 dated 6.1.1976, to take the Integrated Milk Project into the fold of A.P. Dairy Development Corporation. The contention of the petitioners is that, only the persons who opted for transfer to the said Corporation shall be taken on rolls and they would be entitled to get the benefits of continuing service period as regular service. The petitioners were appointed by the 1st respondent and that they were working under the 1st respondent and none of them opted for transferring their services to the Corporation with an intention to continue under the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent issued letter dated 2.5.1979 to all the organizations, including the 2nd respondent – Krishna District Milk Producers Mutually aided Co-operative Society Limited, Vijayawada, Krishna District, disclosing the details of the employees who opted for permanent transfer to the said Corporation. The said letter does not contain the names of the petitioners, as they did not exercise the option. While so, the 2nd respondent got separated from the Corporation in the year 2002 and became independent. However, it is following the rules and regulations, which were framed by the Corporation. The grievance of the petitioners is that they are being treated as employees of the 2nd respondent, rather than the Government employees. Therefore, they made representations, but the same have not been considered by the Government. Finally, they retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation. The case of the petitioners is that if they are treated as Government employees, they would be entitled to pension. Therefore, the grievance of the petitioners is that though they were paid the terminal benefits, their pension papers were not been forwarded to the Government by the 2nd respondent for treating them as Government servants. The petitioners made number of
representations to the 2nd respondent, the latest being 28.5.2010, but no action has been taken. Hence, the present writ petition.
3. No counter affidavit is filed.
4. From the above, the claim of the petitioners is that they were appointed in the Integrated Milk Project which is under the control of the Government and they are Government servants and they did not opt for transferring their services to the Corporation, which is clear from the letter dated 2.5.1979 of the 1st respondent. The 2nd respondent was some time under the control of Corporation and subsequently got separated. Their grievance is that without their option, they are being treated as employees of the 2nd respondent and though they retired from service and made application to the 2nd respondent dated 28.5.2010 for forwarding their claim to the Government for payment of pension on par with the Government employees, the same has not been considered till dated.
5. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to forward the application of the petitioners said to have been made on 28.5.2010 to the 1st respondent, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order with all the necessary particulars and thereafter, within a period of two months, the 1st respondent – Government, shall consider the claim of the petitioners in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders. No costs.
AVS ------------------------------------12—12—2011
2 issues framed by the court
Whether retired employees of the Integrated Milk Project, who did not opt for transfer to the Corporation, are entitled to government pension.
Whether the 2nd respondent is directed to forward the petitioners' retirement claim to the Government for pension consideration.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioners
Government
Krishna District Milk Producers Mutually aided Co-operative Society Limited, Vijayawada
G.CHANDRAIAH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
