In Brief
Employees appointed under a centrally-sponsored Adult Education Project in Bihar, later absorbed by Jharkhand as regular staff after the Project's closure, sought to count their project service towards pension benefits. The Supreme Court held that services under a time-bound, centrally-funded scheme do not qualify as pensionable Government service under Rule 58 of the Pension Rules, as they lack substantive permanence and Government establishment character. Since Jharkhand's absorption policy explicitly treated absorbed employees as fresh appointees—denying seniority and pay protection but making no express declaration under Rule 59 granting pensionable status—the past service could not be credited. The Court distinguished cases where pension counting was expressly authorized by policy and dismissed the appeals.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.