Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:17695 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19252 of 2021 Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Suneel Kumar Singh Kalhan,Richa Srivastava,Shikha Srivastava,Shivendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing order dated 23.6.2020, Annexure No.1. A further writ of mandamus directing respondents to provide all the benefits including pension to the petitioner by treating him regular in service from 23.7.1986 and not to create any hindrance in treating the petitioner's regularisation from 23.7.1986 by computing the seasonal services prior to confirmation for all retiral benefits. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Seasonal Collection Amin on 23.7.1986 in District Deoria. His name finds mention in the select list prepared in the year 2007 of Collection Amin of District Deoria and his services were regularised in pay scale of Rs.5200-20,200 with grade pay of Rs.2000/- on 31.12.2006. Subsequently the petitioner superannuated from service on 30.7.2017. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that he had given representations to the respondents for adding his services rendered by him while working as Seasonal Collection Amin and grant pension and other post retiral benefits. As the case of the petitioner and other similarly situated employees was not considered by the authorities, they approached this Court by filing Special Apple No.438 of 2017, which was disposed of by means of order dated 23.10.2019, directing the District Magistrate, Deoria to consider and decide representation expeditiously by reasoned and speaking order. 5. In compliance of directions issued by this Court dated 23.10.2019, representation of the other similarly situated persons was considered by the respondents and the same was rejected by order dated 23.6.2020, on the ground that they never worked as regular employee; rather on seasonal basis and consequently the services rendered as Seasonal Collection Amin cannot be counted towards grant of pension and accordingly rejected the representation. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that not providing the benefit of the judgment of this Court in the case of Kaushal Kishore Chaubey and 4 Others Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others, Writ -A No. 5817 of 2020 (decided on 08.10.2021) is illegal and arbitrary as well as contrary to the law laid down in aforesaid judgment and order. 7. It is stated that persons similarly placed who were initially appointed as Seasonal Collection Amin, had approached this Court for similar relief. This Court after considering entire conspectus of the matter has given following finding :- "24. In view of the above discussion and given the law elucidated by the Apex Court as well as by this Court in various pronouncements referred above, the services rendered by the petitioners as Seasonal Collection Amin cannot be ignored for extending the benefits of pension and other retiral benefits to them on the pretext that their appointment is to be treated from the date of regularisation and nor from the date of their engagement as work charged employee. 25. Consequently, the writ petitioner is allowed. A writ of mandamus is issued to the respondent to compute pensionary benefit payable to the petitioners after taking into account their entire service including the service rendered by them as Seasonal Collection Amin. The amount payable to the petitioners shall be computed within three months from the date of presentation of a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of Allahabad High Court, and the same shall be paid within the next two months. The respondents shall also continue to pay current pensionary benefits as and when the same fell due." 8. Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the writ petition and has submitted that relief sought by the petitioner cannot be granted as the services rendered by him as Seasonal Collection Amin cannot be counted towards counting their length of service for pensionary benefits and the petitioner had never worked as regular employee. It is stated that the petitioners were appointed as Collection Amin on substantial capacity and their services rendered previously cannot be considered for grant of pensionary benefits and his regular services can be counted only from the date of his regularisation and not previously. 9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 10. It is noticed that coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Kaushal Kishore Chaubey (supra) has considered the entire conspectus of the controversy and has taken into consideration various judgments and in the case of similarly situated Seasonal Collection Amins has observed that the services rendered by them as Seasonal Collection Amin will also be counted towards calculation of pensionary benefits of such persons. 11. It is further noticed that on the previous date this Court had granted time to learned Standing Counsel to inform this Court as to whether judgment in the case of Kaushal Kishore Chaubey (Supra) has attained finality. Learned Standing Counsel submits that he could not obtain any instructions in this regard. 12. Considering that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment of coordinate bench of this Court in the case of Kaushal Kishore Chaubey (supra) and there is no reason as to why same benefit cannot be granted to the petitioners. Accordingly, present writ petition is liable to be allowed in terms of the directions issued in the case of Kaushal Kishore Chaubey (supra). 13. In view of the above, the services rendered by the petitioner as Seasonal Collection Amin cannot be ignored for extending the benefits of pension and his retiral benefits to them on the pretext that his appointment is to be treated from the date of regularisation and not from the date of his engagement as work charged employee. 14. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 23.6.2020 is quashed. A writ of mandamus is issued to the respondents to compute pensionary benefit payable to the petitioner after taking into account his entire service including the services rendered by them as Seasonal Collection Amin. The amount payable to the petitioner shall be computed within three months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order and the same shall be paid to them within the next two months. The respondent shall also continue to pay current pensionary benefits as and when the same falls due. Order Date :- 27.3.2025 kkb/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench