Pension : Supreme Court Rejects Claim Of Employees To Count Entire Period Of Work-Charged Service For Pension

The Supreme Court has recently held that service rendered as work charged employee cannot be counted for the purpose of pension. The Court refused to accept a plea to consider the entire period of work charged service as service for computing pension and upheld a rule framed by the Bihar Government by which the work-charged service will be counted only to the extent of shortfall in the qualifying minimum period of service for pension for an employee, who was subsequently regularised. A bench comprising Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar was considering the following question :“Whether the entire service rendered as work charged under the work charged establishment shall have to be counted and/or considered for the determination of the amount of pension after the work charged employees are regularized under the Work Charged Establishment Revised Service Conditions (Repealing) Rules, 2013?.Answering the issue in the negative, the bench observed :“The work charged employees are not appointed on a substantive post. They are not appointed after due process of selection and as per the recruitment rules. Therefore, the services rendered as work charged cannot be counted for the purpose of pension or quantum of pension. However, the bench agreed that a portion of the work-charged service can be computed for pension, in accordance with the rules :"However, at the same time, after rendering of service as work charged for number of years and thereafter when their services have been regularized, they cannot be denied the pension on the ground that they have not completed the qualifying service for pension. That is why, the service rendered as work charged is to be counted and/or considered for the purpose of qualifying service for pension,which is provided underRule 5(v) of the Rules, 2013.”The bench of Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar was hearing a set of appeals against orders passed by the Patna High Court. The appeals were preferred by the original writ petitioners – work charged employees – whose services were subsequently regularized as per the Work Charged Establishment Revised Service Conditions (Repealing) Rules, 2013. At the heart of the appeals is a dispute relating to the counting of the period of work charged services for the purpose of computing pensionary benefits and the length of pensionable service. Notably, while hearing letter patent appeals, the Patna High Court upheld Rule 5(v) of the 2013 Rules, holding that the period spent in the work charged establishment would be counted only to the extent of the shortfall in the qualifying period of service for grant of pension. This rule, inter alia, granted pension and gratuity benefits to work charged employees who were subsequently regularised by recognising one year of regular service for every five years of work charged service. In spite of this, if the minimum pension paid service remained incomplete for pension acceptance, the benefit of the pension would be given by adding minimum service to that extent, under this rule. Therefore, the entire period spent under the work charged establishment would not be taken into account while granting pensionary benefits. However, the appellants have argued before the apex court that their earlier services rendered as work charged employees could not be wiped out or ignored for the purpose of pension. These appellants, it was submitted, had rendered services as work charged employees for more than 30 to 35 years and were granted other benefits like those under the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) scheme during that period. They also submitted that the nature of their work was regular and periodical for a monthly salary, and as such, their services were not qualitatively different from regular employees. However, the bench was unwilling to accept their submission that the entire duration of service rendered as work charged should be considered for the purpose of pension. Justice Shah, who authored the judgement, wrote: “[This] would tantamount to regularising their services from the initial appointment as work charged. As per the catena of decisions of this court, there is always a difference and distinction between a regular employee appointed on a substantive post and a work charged employee working under work charged establishment.” The bench observed that since work charged employees are not appointed on a substantive post or after due process of selection and in accordance with recruitment rules, their services rendered as work charged employees cannot be counted for the purpose of pension or its quantum. However, at the same time, after rendering such service for a number of years and subsequently being regularised, such employees cannot be denied the pension on the ground that they have not completed the qualifying service for pension. The bench concluded, “That is why, the service rendered as work charged is to be counted and/or...

Pension : Supreme Court Rejects Claim Of Employees To Count Entire Period Of Work-Charged Service For Pension

Awstika Das

Tags