- (1.) HEARD Dr. Y.K. Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for the appellant. No one appears for the respondent in the revised call. ,
(2.) THE State of U.P. is aggrieved by the judgment dated 10/2/2004 in Writ Petition No. 39982 of 1993, by which the writ petition has been allowed to the extent that late Shri Radha Charan lal's services rendered by him in Cooperative Union have been directed to be added in his total length of service as Assistant Development Officer for terminal benefits and pension. During the pendency of the writ petition late Radha Charan Lal died on 7/2/1999. His widow Smt. Prema Devi has been substituted in his place. Late Shri Radha Charan Das joined Cooperative Cane Union as Cooperative Supervisor Grade III on 16/5/1952. He worked upto 2.1.1979 after which he was appointed as Assistant Development Officer/Cooperative Inspector Grade-II and retired on 31.10.1984. Learned Standing Counsel submits that learned Single Judge has erred in law in directing, that his services as Cooperative Supervisor in the Cooperative Cane Union be counted towards pension. The employment with the Cooperative Union is not an employment with the State Government and that under the Pension Rules only the services rendered by the Government servant with the State Government alone can be counted for pension. He submits that Rule 22-B of the Financial Hand Book (Vol.2 Part II to IV) is relevant for the purpose of deciding the case. Rule 22-B is quoted as below: "22-B. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in these rules, where a Government servant holding a post in substantive, temporary or officiating capacity is promoted or appointed either in a substantive, temporary or officiating capacity to another post carrying duties and responsibilities of greater importance than those attached to the post held by him, his initial pay in the time-scale of the higher post shall be fixed at the stage next above the pay arrived at by notionally increasing his pay in respect of the lower post by one increment at the stage at which such pay has accrued."
(3.) IN State of U.P. and others v. Permanand Srivastava, 2009 (4) ADJ 568 (DB), relying upon a judgment of Supreme Court in State of U.P. and others v. Ruk Mangal Singh Rathaur, (2006) 13 SCC 662, it was held by this Court that on the clear intendment of the legislature the services rendered as Cooperative Supervisor in Cooperative Union under the Cooperative Regulations do not carry pensionary benefits. The Cooperative Supervisors are under the control of Cooperative Federation Authority. The question for counting the services of Cooperative Supervisors, after they are appointed as Assistant Development Officer/Cooperative Inspector Grade II, is thus no longer res integra.;