STATE TIMES NEWS
JAMMU: Justice Tashi Rabstan while deciding the common question of law “Whether the services rendered by an employee while working as “Anganwari Worker” prior to his/her substantive appointment to the post of Supervisor in the Social Welfare Department would count for pensionary benefits in terms of Rule 177-A of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services Regulation, Thursday allowed the petition and directed respondents to count 50% of the Civil Services rendered by the petitioners as Anganwari Workers as qualified for pension together with the period of services rendered in the regular establishment. In case total of two spells of service rendered by the petitioners qualifies for the requisite requirement then they would be eligible for pension and other post retiral benefits admissible to the employee of the State. Respondents are, therefore, directed to process the case of all the three petitioners for grant of pensionary benefits in light of the observations made hereinabove within a period of one month.
The facts are not in dispute. All the three petitioners claim to have been appointed as Anganwari Workers on different dates. They were, however, later on appointed by way of selection to the post of Supervisor in the Social Welfare Department. All three petitioners have superannuated while holding posts of Supervisors in Social Welfare Department borne on the Jammu and Kashmir Social Welfare (Non-Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1991. It appears that on the superannuation of the petitioner, Ganesh Kumari, her case for release of post retiral benefits including pension was processed in the office of Child Development Project Officer, Samba and forwarded to respondent No.4-Accountant General. The case of Ganesh Kumari was rejected by office of respondent 4 -Accountant General, on the ground that she had only rendered temporary service of seven years, as such, pension was not admissible to her as per the Pension Rules. She has, however, been held entitled to terminal gratuity. Though case of writ petitioner-Ganesh Kumari was processed and rejected, the pension case of other petitioners was not even processed by their employers.
Justice Tashi Rabsatn after hearing both the sides observed that It is true that Rule 177-A of J&K CSR does not per se provide for reckoning of services rendered by an employee as Anganwari Worker but the fact remains that such services cannot be said to be in any manner different from or inferior to the services rendered by an employee in his/her capacity as work charged employee/whole time contingent paid staff including daily rated worker(s). Rule 177-A was recast vide Notification/SRO 154 dated 28th April 1997. Explanation to Rule 177-A was inserted vide Notification/SRO 328 dated 24th November 1998. It provides that “Whole time contingent paid worker means a worker other than casual/worker, brought on regular establishment and paid on permanent in a graded scale by debit to contingencies, who shall be eligible for pensionary benefits under rules.” The Explanation inserted to Rule 177-A, therefore, provides that whole time contingent paid worker means a worker, who is brought on regular establishment and is paid on permanent basis in a grade scale, who shall also be eligible for pensionary benefits under rules. It is pertinent to point out here that the provision of pension is beneficial in nature, which ought to receive a liberal interpretation so as to serve the object underlying pension scheme. However, if benefits of counting 50% service is only restricted to work charged employee/whole time contingent paid staff including daily rated worker(s) then Rule 177-A of J&K CSR would have to be declared as arbitrary, discriminatory and unconstitutional.
Court hold that the services rendered by the petitioners as Anganwari Workers in the Social Welfare Department before being substantively appointed to the civil post of Supervisor shall be deemed to have been provided under Article 177-A of J&K CSR and term “Anganwari Worker” shall be read into along with “work charged employee/whole time contingent paid staff including daily rated worker(s)”. In that view of the matter, services rendered by the petitioners as Anganwari Workers cannot be ignored and if 50% of the services rendered by the petitioners are counted as qualifying for pension, all the petitioners would qualify for pension.
With these observations Court allowed these three petitions are allowed. Respondents are directed to count 50% of the Civil Services rendered by the petitioners as Anganwari Workers as qualified for pension together with the period of services rendered in the regular establishment. In case total of two spells of service rendered by the petitioners qualifies for the requisite requirement then they would be eligible for pension and other post retiral benefits admissible to the employee of the State. Respondents are, therefore, directed to process the case of all the three petitioners for grant of pensionary benefits in light of the observations made hereinabove within a period of one month from the date of passing of this order and Accountant General would release the pension and other benefits in favour of the petitioners within a period of one month thereafter.