N MANILAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPLICANT who is presently working as Scientist/Engineer-SF under the 3rd respondent commenced service under the Kerala Government (Department of Technical Education) with effect from 8.12.67. While so, he applied for appointment in Keltron, a Government of Kerala Undertaking, through proper channel, and with prior permission of the then controlling authority. On being offered an appointment in Keltron, the applicant tendered his technical resignation from the Directorate of Technical Education. He was relieved from the Directorate of Technical Education with effect from 28.2.78. His technical resignation was accepted with effect from 28.2.78 as per A-1 order dated 3.7.78. Thus the applicant had rendered 10 years, 2 months and 20 days' service under the Government of Kerala before joining the Public Sector Undertaking, Keltron (Kerala State Electronic Development Cooperation). Under Keltron he had worked for 3 years, 9 months and 16 days. He left Keltron to take up employment with Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC). This was also with proper permission. A No Objection Certificate dated 4.3.1981 from Keltron was submitted by the applicant at the time of interview. Right from 19.12.1981 the applicant has been working under the VSSC and his date of superannuation is 3.6.2007. His pensionable service under the VSSC comes to 25 years, 5 months and 14 days. For full pension, 33 years' service is required. Unless the State Government service rendered by the applicant is reckoned towards pension, he will get only the pension proportionate to 25 years, 5 months and 14 days' service. Realising this the applicant made an application in that regard to VSSC on 18.5.89. However, his request was ultimately turned down by the VSSC on the ground that there was an intervening non-pensionable service rendered by him in a Public Sector Undertaking, which caused interruption and which could not be condoned. A-2 is the true copy of the memorandum dated 2.11.93 by which his request was turned down. The applicant averred that in a similar case in O.A. 491/91, this Tribunal rejected the contention raised by the same respondent and directed counting of past service rendered by K.G. Shenoy, Head, PSD, VSSC, applicant therein. In another case also in O.A. No. 1749/98, this Tribunal negatived the contention of the 2nd respondent. The applicant again submitted a representation dated 6.10.2000 (A-3) to the Comptroller, VSSC pointing out the similar cases and this representation was rejected by A-4 memo dated 8.12.2000. A-2 and A-4 are impugned and the applicant has filed this O.A. under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:

(2.) Respondents have filed reply statement taking the plea of limitation and averred that the request of the applicant for reckoning of his past service with the Education Department, Government of Kerala for the period from 8.12.1967 to 28.2.1978 was examined in the light of the instructions issued by the Department of Space in consultation with the Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India. Since there was an intervening non-pensionable service (the service rendered in Keltron) and not an "interruption" between his service in the Government of Kerala and in the Government of India, his request could not be acceded to. After resigning from Government of Kerala service, he had worked in Keltron, a Public Sector Undertaking for 3 years 9 months and 16 days, i.e. from 1.3.78 to 17.12.1981 and thereafter he joined VSSC. His application for employment in VSSC was not forwarded through proper channel. The conditions or circumstances under which a No Objection Certificate was issued are not known to the respondents. Keltron is not a party in this O.A. and therefore the O.A. is liable to be dismissed.

(3.) APPLICANT filed rejoinder contending that the matter being one of fixation of pension reckoning the State Government Service towards Central Government pension is one with a recurring nature and therefore despite the dates of the impugned orders, the case is well within the period of limitation. Further the applicant is still in service and his date of superannuation is in 2007. His pension papers will be processed only two years prior to that. The question of fixation of pension taken up by the applicant is well within the time limit. The non-pensionable service in Keltron will not affect the claim of the applicant as this is an area squarely covered by the decisions of this Tribunal in O.A. 479/91 and 1749/98. The respondents are supplementing fresh reasons for substantiating; A-4 order through the reply statement and are trying to reopen settled legal issues.