Kul Kamal Kant Tiwari and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Revenue U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko. and 2 Others

Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3479 of 2022 Petitioner :- Kul Kamal Kant Tiwari And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Revenue U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amarendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶1Heard Sri Amarendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶2By means of present writ petition the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs: "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of cetiorari quashing the order dated 24.08.2020 contained in Annexure No.1, passed by the State Government of U.P. and order dated 24.08.2020, contained in Annexure No.2, passed by Collector, opposite party no.3 with all service consequential benefits.

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to pay pensionary benefits as well as pension till the date of their retirement along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of its due till the date of actual payment, without reference to the orders, contained in Annexure nos.1 and 2, impugned in the petition."

¶3It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners were appointed on the post of Seasonal Collection Amin on 02.12.1986, 15.04.1988 and 27.04.1989 in District Deoria. Their names find mention in the select list prepared in the year 2007 of Collection Amin of District Deoria and in the year 2007, their services were regularised in pay scale of Rs.5200-20,200 with grade pay of Rs.2000/-. Subsequently the petitioners superannuated from service on

31.08.2017, 31.10.2015 and 31.10.2014.

¶4It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that they had given representations to the respondents for adding their services rendered by them while working as Seasonal Collection Amin and grant pension and other post retiral benefits. As the case of the petitioners and other similarly situated employees was not considered by the authorities, they approached this Court by filing Special Apple No.438 of 2017, which was disposed of by means of order dated 23.10.2019, directing the District Magistrate, Deoria to consider and decide representation expeditiously by reasoned and speaking order.

¶5In compliance of directions issued by this Court dated

23.10.2019, representation of the other similarly situated persons was considered by the respondents and the same was rejected by order dated 24.08.2020, on the ground that they never worked as regular employee either on temporary or daily wage or as work charge employee and consequently the services rendered as Seasonal Collection Amin cannot be counted towards grant of pension and accordingly rejected the representation.

¶6Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that not providing the benefit of the judgment of this Court in the case of Kaushal Kishore Chaubey and 4 Others Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others, Writ -A No. 5817 of 2020 (decided on 08.10.2021) is illegal and arbitrary as well as contrary to the law laid down in aforesaid judgment and order.

¶7It is stated that persons similarly placed who were initially appointed as Seasonal Collection Amin, had approached this Court for similar relief. This Court after considering entire conspectus of the matter has given following finding :- "24. In view of the above discussion and given the law elucidated by the Apex Court as well as by this Court in various pronouncements referred above, the services rendered by the petitioners as Seasonal Collection Amin cannot be ignored for extending the benefits of pension and other retiral benefits to them on the pretext that their appointment is to be treated from the date of regularisation and nor from the date of their engagement as work charged employee.

¶25Consequently, the writ petitioner is allowed. A writ of mandamus is issued to the respondent to compute pensionary benefit payable to the petitioners after taking into account their entire service including the service rendered by them as Seasonal Collection Amin. The amount payable to the petitioners shall be computed within three months from the date of presentation of a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of Allahabad High Court, and the same shall be paid within the next two months. The respondents shall also continue to pay current pensionary benefits as and when the same fell due."

¶8Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the writ petition and has submitted that relief sought by the petitioners cannot be granted as the services rendered by them as Seasonal Collection Amin cannot be counted towards counting their length of service for pensionary benefits and the petitioners had never worked as regular employee. It is stated that the petitioners were appointed as Collection Amin on substantial capacity and their services rendered previously cannot be considered for grant of pensionary benefits and their regular services can be counted only from the date of their regularisation and not previously.

¶9Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶10It is noticed that coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Kaushal Kishore Chaubey (supra) has considered the entire conspectus of the controversy and has taken into consideration various judgments and in the case of similarly situated Seasonal Collection Amins has observed that the services rendered by them as Seasonal Collection Amin will also be counted towards calculation of pensionary benefits of such persons.

¶11It is further noticed that on the previous date this Court had granted time to learned Standing Counsel to inform this Court as to whether judgment in the case of Kaushal Kishore Chaubey (Supra) has attained finality. Learned Standing Counsel submits that he could not obtain any instructions in this regard.

¶12Considering that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by the judgment of coordinate bench of this Court in the case of Kaushal Kishore Chaubey (supra) and there is no reason as to why same benefit cannot be granted to the petitioners. Accordingly, present writ petition is liable to be allowed in terms of the directions issued in the case of Kaushal Kishore Chaubey (supra).

¶13In view of the above, the services rendered by the petitioners as Seasonal Collection Amin cannot be ignored for extending the benefits of pension and other retiral benefits to them on the pretext that their appointment is to be treated from the date of regularisation and not from the date of their engagement as work charged employee.

¶14Consequently, the writ petitioner is allowed. The impugned order dated 24.08.2020 is quashed. A writ of mandamus is issued to the respondents to compute pensionary benefit payable to the petitioners after taking into account their entire service including the services rendered by them as Seasonal Collection Amin. The amount payable to the petitioners shall be computed within three months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order and the same shall be paid to them within the next two months. The respondents shall also continue to pay current pensionary benefits as and when the same fell due. [Alok Mathur,J.] Order Date :- 18.12.2024 / KR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench