AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anand Byrareddy, J.—The petition coming on for preliminary hearing, the learned Government Pleader is directed to take notice for Respondent No. 1. Notice to Respondent No. 2 is dispensed with.
The Petitioner was working as and First Division Assistant in the (sic) Respondent-Institution at the time of his retirement Bio was appointed with the second Respondent on 16.08.1972. It was an aided post and the Petitioner was entitled to benefits therein. The Petitioner as well as the second Respondent have paid their respects contributions towards T.B.S. Scheme from 16.08.1972. The details of the same are furnished in terms of Annexure-A to the petition.
The Petitioner had availed of an LIC policy from the year 1972 itself, a copy of the same is produced. His appointment was approved on 16.08.1972. Hence, it is the Petitioner''s limited claim that in fixing his retirement benefits, his service ought to be construed from 16.08.1972 and not from the date of approval of his appointment In spite of several representations of the Petitioner, the Respondents have stonewalled the same and refused to consider his request from 16.08.1972.
The averments if accepted as being proved and correct, the Petitioner has a case for his retirement benefits being construed from the date of appointment from 16.08.1972 and not from the date of approval.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Annexure-C is quashed, the Respondent No. 1 is directed to fix his retirement benefits taking into consideration his appointment as 16.08.1972. The same shall be given effect to within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, after verification of the particulars furnished by the Petitioner.