Augustine George Masih, J. - (1.) PETITIONER in this writ petition is a former Member of a Legislative Assembly, Haryana, to which he was elected in May 1982 from 42 Rohar Assembly Constituency, District Sonepat and continued as such for a full term of 5 years till the general elections were held on 17.6.1987. He claimed pension under the Haryana Legislative Assembly (Allowances and Pension of Members) Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1975 Act') which was denied to him on the ground that he was drawing Rs. 3500/ -per month as salary from Kurukshetra University vide order dated 15.12.1987 (Annexure P -2) and, thus, not entitled to pension as an ex -MLA under the provisions of Section 7 -A(2) of the 1975 Act. The Petitioner, thus, filed the present writ petition challenging the vires of Sections 7 -A(2)(iii) and 7 -A(3) of the 1975 Act being violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India. He had further claimed therein that the denial of pension to the Petitioner under Section 7 -A(2)(iii) of the 1975 Act was misconceived as he was not covered under any of the categories enumerated therein which disentitles a person to pension. The Petitioner was a Professor of English in Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, prior to his election as a Member of the Legislative Assembly and after he ceased to be so, he rejoined his service. The Kurukshetra University would not fall within any of the categories mentioned in Section 7 -A(2) of the Act which disentitles a person who is employed on salary under the Government(s) or authorities as specified therein, to be not entitled to pension under the 1975 Act.
(2.) UPON notice having been issued, the Respondents have filed reply wherein it has been stated that the Petitioner was not entitled to pension as his case was covered by the term "local authority" as provided under Section 7 -A(2)(iii) of the Act which disentitles a person to claim pension. University is covered by the term "local authority" and as the Petitioner was employed on salary with Kurukshetra University, he was not entitled to pension under the 1975 Act. It has further been stated that the Petitioner on his retirement from Kurukshetra University from the post of Professor in English with effect from 30.4.1998 on attaining the age of superannuation has been granted pension with effect from 1.5.1998 as per the amended provisions of the 1975 Act and is not entitled to any further benefit. Counsel for the Petitioner at the very outset gave up the challenge to the vires which has been posed to Sections 7 -A(2)(iii) and 7A(3) of the 1975 Act by stating that with the amendment of Section 7 -A(3) of the 1975 Act, he does not have any grouse left qua this Section as he has been granted pension after his retirement from the University with effect from 1.5.1998 which earlier had disentitled him as per the unamended provisions.
(3.) AS regards Section 7 -A(2)(iii) of the 1975 Act, he contends that even if the provisions are taken to be valid, the case of the Petitioner being not covered under the same, the claim of the Petitioner could not have been denied by the Respondents vide order dated 15.12.1987 (Annexure P -2). He contends that local authority has not been defined under the 1975 Act and, therefore, in the absence of such a definition, the provisions of General Clauses Act as applicable to Haryana, will apply, according to which, 'University' is not included in the local authority. The Petitioner being not covered by the above provision, would be entitled to the benefit of pension under the 1975 Act.;