SUDHIR AGARWAL, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri G.P. Pal, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
(2.) IT is not in dispute that the petitioner was engaged as Seasonal Collection Peon on 13.06.1963, regularised as Collection Peon on 31.01.1996, confirmed on the post of Collection Peon on 04.09.2000, attained the age of superannuation on 28.02.2005 and retired from the said post. Considering his qualifying service of less than 10 years, the respondents have not paid any pension to him hence this writ petition. Reliance is placed by learned counsel for the petitioner on a Division Bench decision of this Court in Board of Revenue and others Vs. Prasidh Narain Upadhyay, 2006(1) ESC 611. However, having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the record, I do not find any merit in the writ petition.
(3.) IT is no doubt true that pension being deferred wages, as held by Hon'ble Apex Court in D.S. Nakara Vs. Union of India 1983 (1) SCC 305, is not a bounty but right but simultaneously it is also true that pension when payable is governed by the statuary rules or the statute and in case the rules do not provide for the same it cannot be claimed at all. The petitioner from 1963 to January, 1996 remained a Seasonal Collection Peon and only on 31.01.1996 he was appointed against a substantive vacancy, kept on one year probation and was appointed in pay scale of Rs. 750-940 as Collection Peon. After completion of period of probation vide order dated 04.09.2000 he was also confirmed on the post of Collection Peon. He retired on 28.02.2005 after attaining the age of superannuation i.e., 60 years as provided under Fundamental Rule 56.;