JUDGMENT : DEEPAK ROSHAN, J. 1. Since common issue is involved in both these writ applications; as such, both were heard together and being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. In W.P.(S) No. 3319 of 2012, the petitioners have made following prayers: “(i) For issuance of writ(s), order(s), direction(s) commanding upon the respondents to grant Pension and Assured Career Promotion benefits to the petitioner reckoning his services from 07.09.1979 to 20.03.2011 during which period he continuously worked on daily wages i.e. since prior to 1.8.1985, the cut off date without any blemished service career and to the satisfaction of the authorities concerned; And/Or Pass such other order or orders as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper for doing conscionable justice to the petitioner in the facts and circumstances mentioned herein below.” 3. In W.P.(S) No. 4168 of 2012, the petitioner has made following prayers: “A. the respondents be directed to fix and make payment of final pension to the petitioner after calculating his services of 33 years as pump operator in daily wages in view of the two decisions of the Hon’ble Patna High Court vide annexures-7 and 8 and the orders dated 18.8.2009 in WPS No.498/2009 and order dated 23.6.2010 passed in LPA No. 588 of 2009; B. The respondents be directed to make payment of the aforesaid pension along with 12% interest thereon, which be calculated from the date of retirement till actual payment; C. The respondents be directed to make compensation to the petitioner because he is being harassed and victimized inasmuch as he is being dragged to this Hon’ble Court, especially when his matter has already been decided by the Hon’ble Patna High Court and by this Hon’ble Court.” 4. During pendency of W.P.(S) No. 3319 of 2012, the original petitioner died and the legal heirs of the original petitioner were substituted vide order dated 04.04.2013. Factual Matrix of W.P.(S) No. 3319 of 2012 5. The original petitioner, namely, Jawahar Prasad worked continuously on daily wages as Pump Khalasi in Minor Irrigation Division, Dumka continuously from 1979 to 2011. Pursuant to the advertisement in 2010 and undertaking selection process, the services of the original petitioner were regularized and he was appointed as Peon on the revised scale of Rs. 4440-7440/- with Grade Pay of Rs. 1300/- vide Letter No. 590 dated 16.03.2011 issued by the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Development Department, Deoghar. Pursuant to the advertisement in 2010 and undertaking selection process, the services of the original petitioner were regularized and he was appointed as Peon on the revised scale of Rs. 4440-7440/- with Grade Pay of Rs. 1300/- vide Letter No. 590 dated 16.03.2011 issued by the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Development Department, Deoghar. After working continuously since 21.03.2011, the original petitioner retired on attaining the age of 60 years. The original petitioner made a representation to the respondent for grant of pension and A.C.P benefits but the respondents did not respond. Being aggrieved of the action of the respondents, the original petitioner has filed this writ application. Factual Matrix of W.P.(S) No. 4168 of 2012 6. The petitioner worked continuously as Pump Operator on daily wages at Minor Irrigation Revenue Division, Dumka Sivir, Deoghar from 01.08.1978 to 20.03.2011. By the decision of the Departmental Selection Committee, Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Deoghar, the services of the petitioner were regularized and he was appointed on the post of Correspondent Clerk in the pay scale of Rs. 5200-20200/- vide Letter No. 588 dated 16.03.2011. Subsequently, the petitioner joined his services on the post of Correspondent Clerk at Irrigation Division, Dumka vide joining letter dated 24.03.2011. He retired as Correspondent Clerk on attaining the age of 60 years vide Order No. 442 dated 30.04.2012. The petitioner worked as Pump Operator on daily wages for about 30 years and as Correspondent Clerk for more than one year. The petitioner made a representation for grant of pension but the respondents did not pay any heed to it. Submission: 7. Referring to the judgment of this Court in W.P. (S) No. 1255 of 2013 titled Ajit Kumar Deo and Jaidev Prasad Sinha v. The State of Jharkhand and Others , Ld. Sr. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the prayer of the petitioner(s) in both these writ applications for granting pension after counting the services rendered by them on daily wages is squarely covered by the aforesaid pronouncement. He further submits that on the basis of the decision of this Court vide order dated 22.09.2017 in W.P.(S) No. 1255 of 2013, the prayer of the petitioner(s) may be allowed granting interest at the rate of 12% per annum which may be calculated from the date of retirement till the actual payment. He further submits that on the basis of the decision of this Court vide order dated 22.09.2017 in W.P.(S) No. 1255 of 2013, the prayer of the petitioner(s) may be allowed granting interest at the rate of 12% per annum which may be calculated from the date of retirement till the actual payment. He submits that the wife, namely, Kaushalya Devi, of the original petitioner in W.P.(S) No. 3319 of 2012 has also died during pendency of this writ application. 8. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the period on daily wages cannot be counted in calculation of pension as well as granting A.C.P benefit. Finding 9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the documents annexed with the respective affidavits and the averments made therein it appears that the original petitioner/petitioner in both these writ applications were working on daily wages in the respective respondent-Department. The services of the original petitioner/petitioner were regularized by the decision of the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Development Department, Deoghar vide letter dated 16.03.2011 and the original-petitioner in W.P.(S) No. 3319 of 2012 was appointed on the post of Peon and the petitioner in W.P.(S) No. 4168 of 2012 was appointed as Correspondent Clerk. 10. After regularization, the original petitioner/petitioner continued to work i.e. since 21.03.2011/24.03.2011 and superannuated from service. However, the fact remains unaddressed that they were not granted pension and ACP benefits. In the case of S. Sumnyan v. Limi Niri , (2010) 6 SCC 791 ; the Hon’ble Apex Court was of the view that when the initial appointment has been approved later on, the same will relate back to the date when first contractual/piece rate was made. The entire service period should be computed for any benefit. For brevity relevant para of the aforesaid judgment is quoted hereinbelow:- “44. We may here also appropriately refer to another decision of this Court in G.P. Doval v. Govt. of U.P. [ (1984) 4 SCC 329 : 1984 SCC (L&S) 767] wherein this Court held that regularisation of the services of a person, whose initial appointment although not in accordance with the prescribed procedure but later on approved by an authority having power and jurisdiction to do so would always relate back to the dates of their initial appointment . Para 13 is reproduced hereinbelow: (SCC p. 341) “13. Para 13 is reproduced hereinbelow: (SCC p. 341) “13. … If the first appointment is made by not following the prescribed procedure but later on the appointee is approved making his appointment regular, it is obvious commonsense that in the absence of a contrary rule, the approval which means confirmation by the authority which had the authority, power and jurisdiction to make appointment or recommend for appointment, will relate back to the date on which first appointment is made and the entire service will have to be computed in reckoning the seniority according to the length of continuous officiation. That has not been done in this case.” [Emphasis Supplied] 11. Accordingly, this Court holds that the stand of the Respondents in not acceding to the prayed of the original petitioner/petitioner is not sustainable and the petitioners are entitled for the benefit as prayed for. As a result, the concerned respondent is directed to grant pension/pensionary benefit as well as the ACP benefits within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order; failing which the Respondents shall also be liable to pay interest at the rate of 6% from the date of retirement till the date of actual payment to the legal heirs of the original petitioner in W.P.(S) No. 3319 of 2012 and to the petitioner in W.P.(S) No. 4168 of 2012. 12. Consequently, both writ applications stand allowed with the aforesaid terms. 13. Pending I.As., if any, also stand disposed of.