- (1.) Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to count the contract service period rendered by him towards qualifying service for grant of pensionary benefits.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was appointed after due process of selection from 01.07.2000 to 27.09.2000, 01.07.2001 to 27.09.2001 and 01.07.2002 to 27.09.2002 as Chargeman Grade-II in regular pay scale on contract basis. Thereafter, petitioner was appointed on regular basis as Chargeman Grade-II (Wireless Operator) vide appointment letter dated 25.02.2003 (Annexure P-4). The minimum qualifying service for the purposes of pension and gratuity as per Rule 6.16 (2) Chapter VI Volume II, Punjab Civil Services Rules, is ten years. In case, the service rendered by the petitioner on contract basis was treated as qualifying service, then the petitioner was entitled for pensionary benefits. Petitioner had retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.11.2012. In support of his arguments, learned counsel has placed reliance on Bhakra Beas Management Board and others v. Hari Chand and other, 2012 4 RSJ 175, wherein, it has been held as under:- "5. It is undisputed that the controversy in hand has already travelled up to Hon'ble the Supreme Court and the same was remanded back vide order dated 10.12.2009. Pursuant thereto various appeals/petitions including LPA No. 189 of 2004 (State of Punjab and others v. Mukhtiar Singh, decided on 19.4.2011) came to be listed before the Letters Patent Bench of this Court (of which one of us, M.M. Kumar, J., was also a member). After noticing the provisions of Rule 3.17-A; substantive difference between a 'workcharged' employee and a 'daily rated' employee; Full Bench judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Kesar Chand; and various other judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court, the Letters Patent Bench concluded that for the purposes of seniority, promotion or some other benefits, the service rendered on workcharge basis, ad hoc basis or daily rate basis may not be countable but the same could be counted as qualifying service for the purpose of pensionary benefits."
(3.) Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand has submitted that the petitioner was engaged on three occasions on contract basis for short duration of 89 days during the contingency arising on account of Monsoon season. Learned counsel has further submitted that the said period of service could not be counted as qualifying service for grant of pensionary benefits to the petitioner.;