M.L.Bhat - (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE petitioner's case is that he is not allowed the benefit of service in a Private School on the basis of some Government order by which the previous Government order was superseded and it was desired that those, who retired between 13-6-1979 and 10-1-1986, shall only be given pensionary benefit by including their previous service in non-government institutions, in case they have deposited the shares of the employer towards the Provident Fund etc. THE Govt, order, therefore, makes it possible only for those persons, who have retired between 13-6-1979 and 10-1-1986 to get the benefit of previous service in non-government institutions and it excludes the others from such benefits. THE classification would mean that anybody, who has retired before 13-6-1979 or after 10-1-1986 will not be given the benefit of service in non-government institution. THE classification made by the State on the basis of dates of retirement among the retired government servants does not appear to be reasonable and is opposed to the guarantees contained in Article 14 of the constitution. The Supreme Court in the case of D. S. Nakara, reported in 1983 SC 130 has dealt with a similar question where different pensionary benefits were granted to the retired employees on the basis of their date of retirement. The classification made by the Government in that case on the basis of dates of retirement of the employees was held to be opposed to the equality clause of Article 14 of the Constitution. The principle laid down by the Supreme Court in that authority will squarely apply to the facts of this case also because on the dates of retirement a classification is sought to be made between the retired employees. Some employees, who have retired between particular dates, are given benefits of the previous service in the nongovernment institutions and others, who have retired before or after the said dates or denied the said benefits. This type of classification does not seem to be rational and amounts to undoing the equality. This miscroscopic classiciation is not permissible by the constitution and is opposed to the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution. Accordingly the subsequent Govt, order by which such a classification is made is rendered invalid as it infringes equality clause of the constitution. The result is that the petitioner's service in the non-government institution has to be counted towards his service for the purpose of giving him pensionary and gratuity benefits by the State. According this writ petition would succeed on the short point and the classification made by the State that the benefit of inclusion of service in non-government institutions to such of the employees who have retired between 13-6-1979 and 10-1-1986 and others will not be given the said benefits is held to be bad and the classification is declared invalid.
(3.) THE writ petition succeeds and is allowed. THE respondents are directed to count the petitioner's service is non-government institution for the purpose of computation of his pension and gratuity and treat the Govt, orders No. (Shiksha Anubhag 2) 3&91/15-2-38-3/75/77 dated 16-9-1988 and No. Ma. Pa. 370/15-2-85-36/.73/77 dated 10-1-86 in relation to the petitioner; as non est. Accordingly the order dated 1-11-1989 passed by the respondent No. 2, Annexure 2 to the writ petition, stands quashed. THE respondents will compute the pension and gratuity of the petitioner with three months from the date of communication of this order to them, in accordance with the directions given J hereinabove. With these directions this writ petition is disposed of finally. There will be no order as to costs.;