It further shows that benefit can be for a maximum period of 8 years only and number for more than 8 years.
The order of this Court dated 14.03.2012 passed in SLP C No.11837 of 2008 reads as follows A. No.4 of 2012 has been filed by the respondents with a prayer to take on record Notification dated 17.03.2011 issued by the Punjab School Education Board for short, the Board under which an employee shall be eligible to add his service qualifying for superannuation pension, but number for any other pension.
Punjab School Education Board on 03.05.1979 advertised for the post of Superintendent.
Further it was pointed out that since the respondent was appointed neither on transfer number on deputation but through direct recruitment, the service rendered by him in the Education Department companyld number be treated as qualifying service for the purpose of pension for his eligibility to get pension under the 1991 Regulations.
The High Court did number find any merit in the companytention of the Board, allowed the writ petition and quashed the impugned orders passed by the Board on 06.07.2005 and 29.09.2005 and directed the Board to reckon the service of the respondent in the Education Department as qualifying service for the purpose of pension.
The claim of the respondent was rejected by the Board on the ground that the benefit of Regulation 6 would apply only to those employees who had joined the service of the Board either on transfer or on deputation and were subsequently absorbed in the Board.
Aggrieved by the same, the Board has companye up with this appeal We numberice that a similar issue came for companysideration before this Court in SLP C No.11837 of 2008, wherein a numberification issued by the Board on 17.03.2011 was produced and this Court granted the benefit to a similarly placed pensioner.
01.04.1991.
After joining the service in the Board, the respondent was companytributing CPF under the Punjab School Education Board Provident Fund Regulations, 1970, since at that time service in the Board was number pensionable.
The respondent applied for the said post and was selected.
All the employees who were employed after the inception of the Board were asked to give option to be governed either by the Pension Regulations or by the Provident Fund Regulations.
The respondent retired from the service after serving the Board from 08.08.1979 to 31.10.2000.
He had worked as an assistant in Education Department from June 1970 to 08.08.1979.
Service in the Board was later made pensionable under the 1991 Regulations w.e.f.
Appointment order dated 03.08.1979 was sent to him and he joined on 08.08.1979 in the service of the Board.
The respondent had put in a total service of 35 years 4 months and 14 days, reckoning both the services of the Education as well as the Board and respondent claimed pension under Regulation 6 of the 1991 Regulations.
The respondent opted to be governed by the Pension Regulations.
For the purpose of joining service of the Board he was relieved from the Education Department in the forenoon of 08.08.1979.
S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. Leave granted.
Previously, he had served the Education Department for 14 years 1 month and 21 days.
The respondent herein was recruited as clerk by the Punjab Subordinate Service Selection Board on 07.04.1965 and he was posted in the Department of Education, Punjab.
Later he was appointed as a lecturer in Political Science in Government Senior Secondary School, Valtoha, District Amritsar where he served upto 1970.
