No direction in the aforesaid order directing the respondents to give benefit to the petitioner of his past service so as to make him entitled to the pensionary benefits under the Old Pension Scheme : Delhi High Court
Services rendered to government offices and its holdings is always valued, however for it to acquire the benefits of certain Acts and schemes, it should meet all the requirements. This was held in the judgment passed by a two-bench judge comprising JUSTICES HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN and HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA, in the matter PEON VIJAY KUMAR SHARMA V. UNION OF INDIA & ORS., dealt with an issue where the petitioner filed a petition against the respondent challenging letter dated 23rd July, 2021 whereby the petitioner was not considered to be eligible for the Old Pension Scheme.
Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to extend to the petitioner the benefits of his past service of 05 years 09 months and 02 days rendered in the office of the respondent – The Director General of Police, from 01st November, 1993 to 02nd August, 1999 towards his regular/present service and re-assign the date of his appointment to the post of Peon with effect from 29th October, 2003 to make him entitled to the pensionary benefits under the Old Pension Scheme.
Counsel for the petitioner states that the respondents are depriving the petitioner of the benefits of his past service rendered in the office of respondent for the purposes of the pensionary benefits under the Old Pension Scheme. He states that since the petitioner has been given the benefits of age relaxation to the tune of 14 years 01 month and 06 days for his appointment as a Peon, he ought to have been given the benefit of his past service rendered in the office of the respondents.
After hearing both the parties The hon’ble Delhi High court dismissed the petition and held that the petitioners have filed the present petition seeking quashing of the termination order whereby their services were terminated in September, 1999. The petitioners were recruited on a casual basis but have worked for different period of times running into couple of years. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the pleadings on record, in our considered view, the only direction which can be issued to the respondents is that they shall consider the case of the petitioners in accordance with their rules as and when regular recruitment takes place giving some weightage for the services rendered by the petitioners in the past.