Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.18 seconds)
Samaidin vs D.M. on 28 March, 2018 cites

Yashwant Hari Katakkar vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 19 September, 1994

In the case of Yashwant Hari Katakkar Vs. Union of India and others, (1996)7 SCC 113, wherein it has been held in paragraph no.3, " Dr.Anand Prakash, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Union of India, has contented that on 7.3.1980 when the appellant was prematurely retired he had put in 18 ½ years of quasi-permanent service. According to him, to earn pension it was necessary to have a minimum of 10 years of permanent service. It is contented that since the total service of the appellant was in quasi permanent capacity he was not entitled to the pensionary benefit. There is nothing on the record to show as to why the appellant was not made permanent even when he had served the Government for 18 ½ years. It would be travesty of justice if the appellant is denied the pensionary benefits simply on the ground that he was not a permanent employee of the Government. The appellant having served the Government for almost two decades it would be unfair to treat him as temporary /quasi-permanent . Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case we hold that the appellant shall be deemed to have become permanent after he served the Government for such a long period. The services of the appellant shall be treated to be in permanent capacity and he shall be entitled to the pensionary benefits. We allow the appeal, set aside the judgment of the Tribunal and direct the respondents to treat the appellant as having been retired from service on 7.3.1980 after serving the Government for 18 ½ years (more than 10 years of permanent service) and as such his case for grant of pension be finalized within six months from the receipt of this order. The appellant shall be entitled to all the arrears of pension from the date of retirement. No costs."
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 98 - Full Document
1