In Brief
V. Sukumaran worked as a casual labourer in the Fisheries Department (1976-1983) before securing permanent employment through civil service recruitment (1983). After several years, he transferred back to Fisheries and retired. The State rejected his claim to count casual labour service toward his pension because he was directly recruited rather than regularized like other casual workers. The Court held that pension is a social welfare measure, not a discretionary bounty. Since Sukumaran genuinely rendered 1,678 days of casual service and would have been regularized had he remained, and since Government Orders expressly equated casual service with qualifying service, he must receive pension credit at parity with other casual workers. The appeal was allowed and arrears ordered paid within eight weeks.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.