Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

State Of Odisha And Others vs Niranjan Biswal ......... Opp. Party on 30 August, 2018

Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2018 ORI 445

Author: S. Panda

Bench: S. Panda

                    ORISSA HIGH COURT: CUTTACK

                           W.P.(C) No. 6267 of 2018


  In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the
  Constitution of India.



  State of Odisha and others                     .........     Petitioners.

                                      -versus-

  Niranjan Biswal                                ......... Opp. Party.



               For petitioners : M/s-M.S. Sahoo,
                                 Additional Government Advocate.

               For O.P.        : Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, Sr. Advocate
                                 M/s-Tanmay Mishra and
                                 D.K. Patnaik.

  PRESENT:-
          THE HONOURABLE KUMARI JUSTICE S. PANDA
                          AND
        THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

                    Date of Judgment:      30.08.2018

S. PANDA, J.        The State of Odisha in Panchayati Raj Department

  along with its functionaries, being the petitioners have assailed the

  order dated 17.02.2016 passed by the Odisha Administrative

  Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No. 4396 (C) of 2010

  wherein the present petitioners were directed to consider the

  grievances of the applicants for grant of minimum pension by adding
                                   2




so much period of service from G.P. Secretary service with their

regular service as Village Level Workers to make them eligible to get

minimum pension and accordingly to pay them minimum pension

admissible from time to time from the date of their retirement.


2.          The short fact of the case as delineated in the writ

petition tends to reveal that the present opposite party was initially

joined as Grama Panchayat Secretary on 05.09.1974. While he was

so continuing, pursuant to the resolution of the Panchayat Raj

Department dated 31.03.2008 and 07.02.2009 he was promoted to

the post of Village Level Worker ('V.L.W.' in short) by order dated

28.05.2009. While working as V.L.W., he retired from Government

service on 31.08.2010 on attaining the age of superannuation. After

his retirement, however, his case was not considered to get pension

and other retiral benefits on the plea that the service rendered by

him as Gram Panchayat Secretary prior to promotion as V.L.W. is

not a civil post and thereby he had not completed the minimum

qualifying period of 10 years of service to get the pension and retiral

benefits. Thus, the present opposite filed O.A. No. 4396 (C) of 2010

for a direction to the present petitioners to grant minimum pension

in faovur of the applicant by taking into account of his past service

rendered by him in the post of Gram Panchayat Secretary prior to
                                       3




his appointment as V.L.W. to the extent of short fall in accordance

with the OCS (Pension) Rules, 1992. He further prayed to release all

consequential and financial service benefits in favour of the

applicant accordingly. Similarly situated other employees have also

filed number of Original Applications with the self same prayer. All

such Original Applications were taken up together and disposed of

by the common impugned order dated 17.02.2016.


3.          Learned    Additional     Government   Advocate   for   the

petitioners submitted that the post hold by the applicant as Gram

Panchayat Secretary was not a civil post. The said service was

controlled under Gram Panchayat Act and Rules. Whereas the post

of V.L.W., which is a civil post was controlled by Orissa Village Level

Workers (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2008.

According to him the post of Gram Panchayat Secretary is not a

pensionable post under the Orissa Civil Service (Pension) Rules,

1992. In support of his contentions, he drew our attention of the

said rule to the following extent:-

            Rule-18 provides the conditions subject to which service

qualifies. Sub Rule-2 (iii) prescribes the period of service paid from

contingencies shall not be counted for the purpose of pension.
                                     4




            Sub    Rule-6   of   Rule-18   prescribes   Notwithstanding

anything contained in Clauses (i) and (iii) of Sub-rule (2), a person

who is initially appointed in a job contract establishment and is

subsequently      brought   over    to     the   post   created   under

regular/pensionable establishment, so much of his job contract

service period shall be added to the period of his qualifying service in

regular establishment and would render him eligible for pension.

Sub-Rule-6 was inserted by way of amendment on 01.09.2001.


4.          He therefore, submitted that in view of these two

provisions, the person who are regularized after job contract period

and period of service paid from contigencies are getting pension.

Since the applicant is not coming under such provisions, his service

rendered as Gram Panchayat Secretary cannot be added for

computing the qualifying period of service for minimum pension. The

Tribunal since has not considered all such facts and passed the

impugned order, the same needs to be interfered with.


5.          Learned counsel for the opposite party-applicant before

the Tribunal, however supported the impugned order and contended

that by notification dated 30.10.1998 the State Government has

promulgated an ordinance wherein the salaries of the Gram

Panchayat Secretary has been fixed. The Government has decided to
                                           5




pay them monthly consolidated remuneration of Rs.2200/- with

effect     from     01.11.1998.    The        total   expenses   towards     such

remuneration shall be borne by the State Government from

government contingencies. Therefore, they were getting salary from

the      State    Government.     While       working    as   Gram    Panchayat

Secretaries,       Orissa   Village   Level       Workers     (Recruitment   and

Conditions of Service) Rules, 2008 came into force.

         Rule-4 prescribes the Recruitment of Village Level Worker.

         Sub Rule-1 of Rule-4 prescribes that the vacancies in the post

of Village Level Worker shall be filled up by means of selection from

amongst the Gram Panchayat Secretaries of the District in

accordance with Rule-8.

         Sub Rule-2 of Rule-4 prescribes in case of non-availability of

eligible Gram Panchayat Secretaries the posts remaining unfilled,

shall be filled up by direct recruitment in accordance with Rule-9.

         Rule-8 prescribes the Eligibility criteria and Procedures for

filling up the vacancies.

         Sub Rule-1 of Rule-8 prescribes as follows:-

                 "In order to be eligible for appointment to the service, a

         Gram Panchayat Secretary must have passed High School

         Certificate Examination or any examination equivalent thereto

         or have passed the Middle English School Examination or
                                     6




      other examination of equivalent standard and have rendered at

      least fifteen years of continuous services as Gram Panchayat

      Secretary."

      Sub-Rule 2 of Rule-8 provides that a Committee shall meet to

prepare a list of Gram Panchayat Secretaries of the district, suitable

for promotion to the post of V.L.W.. The case of such Gram

Panchayat Secretaries will be considered for promotion to the post of

V.L.W. in case they found suitable by the committee constituted for

such promotion. The Committee shall prepare a list of all Gram

Panchayat Secretaries of the district according to their date of

substantive appointment in the post of Gram Panchayat Secretary.

The Committee while considering the promotion cases of the suitable

employees and preparation of the list shall follow the provisions of

      (i)     The Orissa Civil Services (Zone of Consideration for

              Promotion) Rules, 1988.

      (ii)    The Orissa Civil Services (Criteria for Promotion) Rules,

              1992 and

      (iii)   The Orissa Civil Services (Criteria for Selection for

              Appointment including Promotion) Rules, 2003.


      Rule-9 of 2008 Rules however prescribes the procedure for

filling up the vacancies by direct recruitment.
                                   7




6.          Learned counsel for    the   opposite   party,   therefore,

submitted that even if the Full Bench decision of this Court in the

case of Sri Adwait Chndra Jena v. Khandahata Grama Panchayat

and others, reported in 1998 (II) OLR 410 held that the post of Gram

Panchayat Secretary is not a civil post, however they are discharging

the duties under the State Government and getting their salaries

from the State Government as stated above. Their only contention

before the Tribunal was that after their services were regularized as

V.L.W. on promotion from the post of Gram Panchayat Secretary, a

few V.L.Ws. had not completed the qualifying period of service to get

the minimum pension. Therefore, the Tribunal recorded the two fold

submission of the applicants to the extent that:

     (i)    Entire service period of the applicants including G.P.

            Secretary period is to be counted for pension.

     (ii)   If entire service period cannot be considered for pension,

            then minimum pension is payable to the applicants.

            According to him, the Tribunal, however considering all

such rules and regulations and the fact that a considerable length of

service the applicants have been rendered as Gram Panchayat

Secretaries, directed the present petitioners to add so much of period

of service from the G.P. Secretary service to that of the service of
                                     8




V.L.W. to make them eligible to get minimum pension. Hence the

order of the Tribunal need not be interfered with.


7.          The Tribunal, while passing the impugned order, has

taken note of all the Rules and Regulations governing the field so far

as Gram Panchayat Secretaries are concerned as well as the Rules

and Regulations with regard to their promotion to the Village Level

Workers are concerned. While dealing with the 2nd submission of the

applicants regarding counting of service to get the minimum

pension, the Tribunal relied on the decision of this Court rendered in

OJC No. 2147 of 1991 dated 24.03.1992, i.e. in the case of

Settlement Class-IV Job Contract Employees Union, Balasore-

Mayurbhanj District v. State of Orissa and others.                    At

paragraph-10 of the judgment, this Court referred the decision

rendered by the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in the case of

D.S. Nakara v. Union of India, reported in AIR 1983 SC 130 and

quoted relevant portion of the said judgment, to the following

extent:-

            "antiquated notion of pension being a bounty, a gratuitous

     payment depending upon the sweet will or grace of the employer,

     not claimable as a right, and, therefore, no right to pension can be

     enforced through court, has been swept under the carpet........".
                                     9




     In paragraph-26, the goals which a pension scheme seeks to

     subserve were noted. It was stated that a pension scheme

     consistent with the available resources must provide that the

     pensioner would be able to live (i) free from want, with decency,

     independence and self respect, and (ii) at a standard equivalent

     at the present retirement level. The Bench posed a question that

     the approach being adopted by it may merit the criticism that if a

     developing country like India cannot provide an employee while

     rendering service a living wage, how can one be assured of it in

     retirement. The question was answered by referring to the social

     philosophy adopted by us. In paragraph-31, this aspect of the

     matter was concluded by saying, inter alia, that pension is not an

     ex-gratia payment, but it is a payment for the past service

     rendered and it is a social welfare measure rendering socio-

     economic justice to those who in the hey day of their life

     ceaselessly toiled for the employer or an assurance that in their

     old age, they would not be left in lurch."

8.          The Tribunal also taken note of the Finance Department

Resolution, wherein it was decided that for the purpose of pension

and pensionary benefits to job contract employees, only their job

contract service period shall be added to the period of qualifying

service in regular establishment.       It has also taken note of the
                                    10




circular issued by the Government in Revenue Department to the

extent that in case any job contract employee going to retire in a

particular year, his service may be regularized one month before his

retirement and they were entitled to get minimum pension.


9.            In view of the discussions made hereinabove paragraphs,

this Court is of the opinion that the Tribunal has passed a reasoned

order. There is no error apparent on the face of it which warrants

interference by this Court in exercise of the jurisdiction conferred

under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

              The writ petition stands dismissed accordingly.



                                                  ...........................
                                                   S. PANDA, J.

K.R. MOHAPATRA, J. I agree.

.................................... K.R. MOHAPATRA, J.

Orissa High Court : Cuttack The 30th August' 2018 /Arun