LexPRADUMAN KUMAR JAIN versus UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, NEW DEIHL AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
PRADUMAN KUMAR JAIN A v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY TO • THE GOVT. OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, NEW DEI.,Hl AND ANR. JULY Il, 1994 B [KULDIP SINGH AND YOGESHWAR DAYAL, JJ.] Service Law-Substantive appoilllment-Held, a person appointed in the Central Government Service against a pernianent vacancy, completing his C probation period successfully, crossing efficiency bar and promoted to higher rank must be treated to be appointed in a substantive capacity and hence entitled to pro rata pension for such period of service in Central Govem- ment-CCS (Pension Rules 1972, Rules 13 and 49(2)(b ). The appellant joined Central Government service' on March 2, 1974. D No specific order confirming him in the service of the Central Government was issued. He resigned and joined the National Thermal Power Corpora- tion (NTPC) a Central Government Undertaking, on October 31, 1986 after being selected for appointment as a Senior Engineer. He approached the Central Administrative Tribunal claiming pro rata pension for the E period of his service under the Central Government. The Tribunal rejected his claim on the ground that he was not a substantive employee of the Central Government. He appealed to the Supreme Court by Special Leave. Allowing the Appeal, this Court F HELD : 1. The question whether the Appellant is entitled to pro rata pension in respect of the service for the period of twelve years and eight months rendered by him under the Central Government depends on the point wlu!ther he held the appointment in the service of the Indian Meteorological Department in a substantive capacity. It is not disputed G that he was appointed as Assistant Meteorologist on October 13, 1977 by way of direct recruitment through the Union Public Service Commission. Direct recruitment, invariably is made against permanent vacancies. It is not the case of the Respondents that the appellant was appointed against a temporary post. The Appellant was therefore appointed as ASsistant Meteorologist against a permanent vacancy. He was on probation_ for a H 305 306 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1994) SUPP. l S.C.R. A period of two years. His crossing the efficiency bar in October 1983 and further promotion to the higher post in September 1986 show that he successfully completed his probation period. In any case it is obvious that the work and conduct of the Appellant have throughout been satisfactory. B c [307-H, 308-D; A·C] 2. A person appointed against a permanent vacancy, completing his probation period successfully, crossing the efficiency bar and even promoted to the higher rank, cannot be considered to be working in an officiating capacity. [308-E] Baleshwar Dass v. State of U.P., [1981] 1 SCR 449, relied on. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 4670 of 1994. From the Judgment and Order dated 24.10.91 of the Central Ad- D ministrative Tribunal, New Delhi in O.A. No. 770 of 1988. Vijay Hansaria, Adv. (NP) for M/s. Jain Hansaria & Co. for the Appeilant. V.C. Mahajan, S.N. Terdol and Ms. Kitty Kumaramangalam for the E Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KULDIP SINGH, J. Special leave granted. F The appellant joined Central Government service on March 2, 1974. He was selected for appointment as Senior Engineer in the National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) , a Central Government Undertak- ing. He joined the NTPC on October 31, 1986. No specific order confirm- ing the appellant in the service of the Central Government was issued. The question before the Central Administrative Tribunal (the Tribunal) , New G Delhi was whether the appellant was entitled to pro rata persion for the period of his service under the Central Government. The Tribunal answered the question in the negative and rejected the claim of the appellant on the short ground that the appellant was not a substantive employee of the Central Government. This appeal by way of special leave H is against the judgment of the Tribunal dated October 24, 1991. P.K. JAIN v. U.O.l [KULDIP SINGH, .I.] 307 The appellant joined the Central Government service on March 2, A 1974 as. Technical Assistant in the Office of the Director General of Supplies & Disposals and worked there till October 12, 1977. On October 13, 1977 he joined the Indian Meteorological Department (!MD) as Assis- tant Meteorologist after being selected through the Union Public Service Commission. He was placed o
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.