Mohd.Ibrahim Khan vs State and Others

The petitioner was appointed as a Laboratory bearer in Government College Anantnagon 2.11.1955. His date of birth in his service bookstands

recorded as 9.9.1934. Later on he was allowed to work as a gasman w.e.f. 1.7.1966, and an entry accordingly made in his service book. The

grade of laboratory bearer and gasman was same when he entered into Government service and even thereafter. However later on the grade of

gasman was raised. According to the petitioner he always worked as a Laboratory bearer though in his service book his designation came to be

changed as gasman. The case of the petitioner is that he belongs to inferior service and therefore in terms of Art.266 (1) of the Jammu and

Kashmir C.S.R, he will attain the age of superannuation at the age of 60 years. He is sought to be retired at the age of 58 years, as allegedly, the

gasman falls in the category of superior service.

The respondents have filed the counter stating therein that the petitioner was initially appointed as the Laboratory bearer but subsequently w.e.f.

1.7.1966 upgraded as gasman. According to them the gasman falls in the category of superior service and therefore the petitioner has to retire on

attaining the age of 58 years. He is not entitled to the benefit of Article 266 (!) of the C.S.R. with regard to age of retirement.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. As agreed to by them, this petition is disposed of at its admission stage itself. I have gone

through the file also.

The short point to be determined in this petition is as to whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of Art. 266(1} of the CSR with regard to

age of superannuation or not.

In this regard we have to find out as to whether the petitioner is a laboratory bearer or a gas man and in case he is held to be gasman, whether

he is entitled to the benefit of Art. 266 (1) as supra.

From the perusal of service book of the petitioner it appears that he was appointed as Laboratory bearer on 2.11.1955. Later on he has been

shown as gasman w.e.f 1.7.1966. No doubt, the scale of pay of the gasman is higher than that of Labortary bearer, but the question is whether

gasman can be treated as belonging to superior service. The Labortary bearer and gasman both are class IV employees, and as such belong to

inferior service. There is a slight difference in the pay scale of Labortary bearer and the gasman but their status is the same.

The Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred me to a judgment given by me in writ petition No. 309 of 1986 titled Syed Hussain Vs.

State and others decided on 10.6.1988 [Sgr. L.J.1989 J and K 17]. In the said judgment I have fully discussed the controversy of superior and

inferior service. It has been observed that the classification of superior and inferior service made by the State suffers from vagueness and

unreasonableness. It has been held that the classification of superior and inferior service made by the State has been made without any intelligible

criteria and similarly circumstanced officials have been treated differently in violation of the mandate of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

In my opinion the above mentioned judgment squarely governs the fate of the present case also. Though the petitioner has been shown as

gasman in his service book but he has throughout worked as labortary bearer. Moreover their status is the same and they belong to class IV

category of employees. The gasman by having a higher scale of pay than laboratory bearer does not fall within the category of class III of the

government servants.

In these circumstances of the case, I allow this petition and hold that the petitioner belongs to inferior service and is entitled to all the

consequential benefits under Art.266 (1) of the CSR, including the age of superannuation . He has already retired from service after attaining the

age of 60 years, having rendered the required tenure of service in terms of Art. 266 (1) supra. He shall be deemed to be in service till he attained

the age of 60 years and paid all the consequential benefits accordingly.