Rule 28 mandates condonation of service interruption, counting prior CRPF service as qualifying service.

The petitioner served in the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) from 7 March 1969 to 1 June 1990, completing approximately 21 years of service, after which he voluntarily retired.

He was appointed as a Watchman in All India Radio (AIR) on 16 December 1994 and served until superannuation on 30 April 2009, rendering approximately 14 years of service.

The petitioner sought counting of his CRPF service for pension and gratuity purposes.

The claim was rejected on the grounds that Rule 7(2) of the CCS (Pension) Rules did not permit a separate pension after re-employment and that Rule 19 applied only to military service, whereas CRPF service was treated as civil service.

The Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed the petitioner’s claim, holding that Rule 19 was inapplicable because CRPF was not military service.

The petitioner thereafter invoked the writ jurisdiction of the Gujarat High Court and relied on Rule 28 of the CCS (Pension) Rules and G. Bhasi v. Union of India, MANU/KE/0889/2017.

Whether the petitioner’s past service in the CRPF could be counted as qualifying service for pension and gratuity after his subsequent employment in All India Radio, notwithstanding the interruption between the two periods of service.

Whether Rule 28 of the CCS (Pension) Rules required automatic condonation of the interruption between the petitioner’s two spells of civil service and treatment of his pre-interruption CRPF service as qualifying service.

Whether the petitioner was disentitled from claiming the benefit of past service merely because he had not expressly mentioned it in the form submitted for his AIR appointment.