Dr. Bharat Bhushan Sharma vs State of H.P. and Others

Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The petition is filed with the following prayer:

(i) That Respondents No. 1 to 3 be directed to count the service of 14 years, 4 months and 4 days (with effect from 15.8.66 to 11.12.80) rendered by the applicant under the State of Jammu and Kashmir prior to the joining the service of Respondent No. 1 for the purpose of all pensionary benefits and after doing so, the necessary instructions be conveyed to the Respondent No. 4 for calculating revised pension and gratuity and any other benefit payable to the applicant on this account.

It is stated in the reply at Paras 6(i) to 6(xii) as follows:

Matter of record and hence not denied. However, it is stated that the request of Dr. Bharat Bhushan Sharma (applicant) for counting of his past service rendered under the Jammu & Kashmir Govt. is under consideration of the Govt. under the rules with the clear condition/understanding that the doctor concerned was appointed in IG Medical College, Shimla on the basis of his application received through proper channel in the H.P. Public Service Commission and that he was relieved by his parent organization in J&K for joining the new assignment in HP and was governed under GPF rules in his parent organization. From the perusal of copies annexed by the applicant with his application, it is evident that the replying Respondent is processing the case for counting his past service rendered under the J&K Govt. on the above lines and will arrive at a decision at the earliest after completion of all formalities.It is wrong to say that the J&K Govt. has supplied the entire information sought by the Replying Respondent as alleged by the applicant. In fact, the J&K Govt. has not responded to the specific query raised by the Replying Respondent through Principal IG Medical College Shimla to the effect whether the State Govt. of J&K will bear the proportionate pensionary liability in respect of service rendered by the applicant under the J&K Govt. to the extent such service would have been qualified for the grant of pension under the rules on service share basis. Similarly, the J &K Govt. has not informed whether the amount of GPF alongwith interest thereon was transfferrr4ed by the AG J&K to AGHP or not and if yes, the detail of transfer and if not reasons thereof. The Replying Respondent have no objection to the counting of past service rendered by the applicant for pensionary benefits in case the J&K Govt. gives its specific acceptance to bear the proportionate pensionary liability on service share basis. The Principal IGMC in his letter annexed at Annexure RA has informed that reply of the J&K Govt. is awaited and will be supplied as and when received.

From the position narrated above, it is evident that request of the applicant is under consideration of the Govt. and appropriate decision will be taken as and when specific information called for is received. The Replying Respondent has again taken up the matter with the J&K Govt. vide copy of letter annexed at R''B'' to expedite the information enabling the Replying Respondent to take a decision at the earliest. The Replying Respondent is keen that the case is processed at the earliest in order to redress the grievances of the applicant under the rules.

Reference is invited to Government of India decision No. 5(2)(b) below Rule 14 of the CCS(Pension) Rules, 1972, which reads as follows:

The liability for pension including gratuity will be borne in full by the Central/State Department to which the Government servant permanently belongs at the time of retirement. No recovery of proportionate pension will be made from Central/State Government under whom he had served

It is submitted that the Petitioner is entitled to get full pension of the services rendered in Jammu and Kashmir. There will be a direction to the first Respondent to take a final decision in the matter and settle the pension case of the Petitioner in the light of the Government of India''s decision referred to above, if not already taken, within two months from the date of production of copy of this judgment by the Petitioner. Needless to say, eligible benefits, if any, to which the Petitioner is entitled, shall be disbursed to him within another one month. The question of interest is left open.

With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.