Surinder Kumar vs The State of H.P. and Others

V.K. Sharma, J.—The Petitioner has filed and maintained the present petition for grant of the following substantive relief vide para 7(a) (relief clause) of the petition:

7(a) Direct the Respondent to grant the pensionary benefits and other dues to the applicant alongwith interest which have been wrongly and arbitrarily denied as applicant has put in 30 years of service with the Respondents.

On perusal of the record and particularly the reply filed on behalf of Respondents No. 1 to 3 and taking into consideration the fact that though the Petitioner, who being an Ex-Air Force personnel had joined employment as a carpenter in the H.P. Industries Department in the year 1960 and was later on on establishment of H.P. State Handicraft and Handloom Corporation was taken on its rolls as such in the year 1974 and had continued as such up to 18.10.1989.

It is not disputed that there is no pension scheme for the employees of the aforesaid Corporation. Admittedly, on retirement, on attaining the age of superannuation, the Petitioner was given all retiral benefits admissible to him under the rules applicable to the service of which he was a member. Thus, in essence the claim setup by him relates only to grant of pension. However, since no such pension scheme is applicable to the employees of the aforesaid Corporation, the claim for pension setup by the Petitioner is not legally tenable.

In view of the above, the petition is dismissed as also pending application(s), if any.