← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/16/2009dismissed

Shyamlal Sahu v. Joint Director Treasuries Acc.And ORS.

2017-05-09Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 16 of 2009 • Shyamlal Sahu, S/o Rajaram, aged about 71 years, R/o Hardi (Jarve), Block Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The Joint Director, Treasuries Accounts and Pension Bilaspur (C.G.)

2. Chief Medical & Health Officer, Janjgir District Janjgir Champa (C.G.)

3. Chief Medical & Health Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

4. State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Department of Health, DKS Bhawan, Raipur(C.G.)

5. The Secretary, Department of General Administration, Member, Secretary, Pension Committee,DKS Bhawan, Raipur(C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioner None For Respondent-State Shri Shashank Thakur, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 09/05/2017 1.

No one appears for the petitioner.

2.

Heard learned State counsel and perused the record. 3.

Petitioner is claiming benefit of the service rendered by him from 17.04.1964 to 24.10.1970, during which he was working as Surveillance Worker on daily wages.

4.

Admittedly, the petitioner has been allowed pension by calculating his services from 24.10.1970 onwards. Petitioner's earlier writ petition bearing WPS No.1725/2008 was disposed of directing the Pension Redressal Committee to consider the petitioner's grievance, whereupon the Committee has examined the papers to conclude that the petitioner is not entitled to count his services from 17.04.1964 to 24.10.1970, as during that period, he was working on contingency basis.

5.

The qualifying services for pension has to be regular service with the State Government. Since admittedly, during the period from 17.04.1964 to 24.10.1970, the petitioner was working on contingency basis and not as regular employee, the said period has rightly been held not caculatable as qualifying service for determination of the total length of pensionable service. 6.

The writ petition has no substance. It deserves to be and is hereby dismissed.

Sd/- JUDGE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA Nirala