ASHOKE KUMAR DASADHIKARI,J. - (1.) The case of the writ petitioner in this writ application is that he was appointed as assistant teacher in the Chinpai High school. Due to falling in strength of students in the concerned school the petitioner's service was not taken by the respondent authorities since 1st January, 1976 go 17th July, 1992 for which the petitioner was not responsible. The respondent authorities could not give him service in any other school. According to the respondents, there is a break in service of the petitioner from 1st January, 1976 to 17th July, 1992. Although the writ petitioner was not responsible for such break he applied for condonation and the concerned authorities condoned such break of service. However, the respondent authorities did not release the pension and the impugned order was passed by the Assistant Director, Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, West Bengal dated 31st March, 2002 and a writ petition being W.P. No.18551(W) of 2003 was moved by the writ petitioner stating therein that although by and under order dated 23rd May, 2000, while condonation the break in service, the Director of School Education, West Bengal did not say that the period from 1st January, 1976 to 17th July, 1992 would be treated as a part of the petitioner's qualifying service for pension.
(2.) This Court while deciding the earlier writ petition has noted that there was break in service of the petitioner for the aforementioned period. He applied for condonation. He was working in a recognised non-Government aided high school. On reaching the age of superannuation he was to retire in January, 2002. After considering his application the Director of School Education gave his decision dated May 23, 2000 wherein the break in service was condoned but the Director disallowed his prayer for salary arrears, pay fixation, increment etc. The Director gave the decision in exercise of power conferred on him by the provisions of the West Bengal Recognised Non-Government Educational Institutions Employees (Death-cum-Retirement) Benefit Scheme, 1981.
(3.) It was recorded in the said judgment that the decision of the Director of School Education, condoning the petitioner's break in service for the period in question, attained finality. Hence, there was no question for anyone to say that his past service for any period stood forfeited. It was also decided in that judgment that in view of the decision of the Assistant Director, he was to be treated as continuing in service without any break and this being the position, the period in question was to be treated as part of his qualifying service, irrespective of whether the Director said so in his decision or not. Accordingly, this Hon'ble Court decided to the following effect : " I therefore have no doubt that the assistant director, pension, provident fund, and group insurance was wrong in concluding that the period was to form a part of the petitioner's qualifying service. He was under the obligation to treat it as a part of the petitioner's qualifying service and calculate and pay pension and other benefits on the basis thereof.";