Taranjit Sharma vs State Of Punjab & Ors.

SUDEEPTI SHARMA J. (Oral)

The challenge in the present writ petition is to order/ communication dated 11.12.2018, whereby, retirement age of the petitioner was held to be 58 years by treating him to be Group ‘C’ employee.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that representation for considering the age of the petitioner, as per Group ‘D’, Class IV employees, has wrongly been rejected.

Per contra, learned counsel for respondents-State argues on the line of the written statement filed by the respondents and prays for dismissal of the petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole file of this case with their able assistance.

A perusal of the written statement shows that petitioner Taranjit Sharma was appointed as Painter in the pay scale Rs.400-

He was then appointed to the post of Earth Work Mistry. The pay scale of Painter and Earth Work Mistry was same i.e. Rs.5910-20200+1900 Grade Pay (Group-C). Vide letter No. 04/46/09- 1PP.1/10828 dated 13/10/2009 of Personnel Department (Personnel Policy Branch-1) of Punjab Government, regarding submission of approval of Fifth Punjab Pay Commission, the classification of posts was done as under :-

In view of above, classification of posts, the post of petitioner who was admittedly getting grade pay of 1900 falls under Group ‘C’.

Further Chief Engineer Canals Irrigation Department Punjab vide his letter No. 1077-1109/5 NGA./2015 Dated 29/01/2015 issued instruction that, the post of Earth Work Mistary falls under Group-C.

Petitioner applied to S.E. B.M.L Circle Patiala for clarification regarding the age of retirement of Earth Work Mistary and S.E. B.M.L Circle Patiala vide letter No. 5671/47 G.E.C. dated 11/12/2018 issued a letter to the petitioner and explained that as per Chief Engineer/Canals letter No. 1077-1109/5 NGA./2015 Dated 29/01/2015 the post of Earth Work Mistary falls in Group-C and age of retirement of Group-C is 58 years.

That age of retirement of Group-C employee is of 58 years. The petitioner was on extension after the age of 58 years. The petitioner had submitted Self Declaration, affidavit, Form for 1^st year extension in service and as per order No.38/862 dated 12/02/2019 (Annexure R-6) of Superintending Engineer Bhakhra Main Line Circle Patiala sanctioned 1st year extension period of service of petitioner from 01/03/2019 to 28/02/2020 because S.E. B.M.L Circle Patiala is sanctioning authority of Group-C employee. The petitioner submitted Self Declaration, affidavit, Form for 2nd year extension in service and as per order No. 28/709 dated 10/02/2020 (Annexure R-7) of S.E. B.M.L Circle Patiala 2nd year extension of service from 01/03/2020 to 28/02/2021 (Annexure R-8) was sanctioned.

As per the written statement Punjab Govt. issued instructions vide letter No. 22/02/2012-3-F.P-2/237 dated.02/03/2020 for reducing the retirement age from 60 to 58 years which is reproduced as under:-

Retirement order of the petitioner vide letter No. 1869-72 dated 27/03/2020 w.e.f. 31/03/2020 was issued as per instructions of Punjab Govt. and Higher office.

The petitioner availed extension in service after 58 years of age. Annexure R-8 attached with the written statement shows that the petitioner himself has stated in his application for one year extension in service period that he proposed to retire on 28.02.2019 after completing 58 years of age. In his self-declaration form also, he has stated that he was to retire on 28.02.2019 after completing 58 years of age.

In view of the above, admittedly and undisputedly the petitioner was working as Earth Work Mistri and his grade pay was Rs.5910-20200+1900 and he falls under Group ‘C’, therefore, I do not find any merit in the present writ petition.

Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed.

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.