उच्चतम न्यायालय ने यह निर्णय दिया कि नियमितीकरण के बाद कर्मचारियों की पूरी कार्य-प्रभारित (work-charged) सेवा को पेंशन (pension) के लिए नहीं गिना जा सकता, बल्कि नियमावली, 2013 के नियम 5(v) के अनुसार प्रत्येक पाँच साल की कार्य-प्रभारित सेवा के बदले केवल एक साल की नियमित सेवा ही जोड़ी जाएगी।
The Supreme Court of India in a recent judgment delivered on April 28, 2023, determined that the entire service rendered as work charged cannot be considered for pension. The bench further added that a portion of the work-charged service can be computed for pension as per Rule 5(v) of the Rules, 2013. The case was presented before a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court including Justice CT Ravikumar, and Justice MR Shah. The bench was hearing the appeals preferred by the work-charged employees against the orders passed by the High Court of Patna. The main question addressed in this case was “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 Rules, 2013?”
In this case, the respective original writ petitioners were initially appointed and working under the work-charged establishment as work charged. The State Government framed the Rules, 2013, under which the services of the original writ petitioners came to be regularized. The original writ petitioners challenged Rule 5(v) of the Rules, 2013 to the extent it provided that for the purpose of counting of pension, regular service of one year for the work charged service of every five years shall be taken into consideration. According to the original writ petitioners, “the entire service rendered as work charged in the work charged establishment is required to be counted and/or considered for the purpose of pension.” There were differences of opinion in the two Division Bench judgments with respect to the counting of the period of work charged services for the purpose of computing pensionary benefits and the length of pensionable service. This was the reason that the matter was referred to the Larger Bench.
The Larger Bench stated that for the purposes of pension, only such period from the work-charged tenure would be added for making the service of an employee which were regularized to qualify him for pension. While adding such a period of work-charged tenure, the modus would be of granting/counting one year for every five years of service rendered under a work-charged establishment. If that also leaves some shortfall, then the further number of years of work-charged tenure can be taken/added for making the service of the employee pensionable. The matter was further heard by the Supreme Court. The bench hearing the case stated that after rendering service as work charged for a number of years and thereafter when their services were regularized, the pension could not be denied on the ground that they did not complete the qualifying service for pension.
The SC further stated that “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 under Rule 5(v) of the Rules, 2013.” Moreover, the bench opined that denying them the pension on the ground that they did not complete the qualifying service for pension would be unjust, arbitrary, and illegal. The service rendered as work charged after their services were regularized under the regularization scheme, namely, the Rules, 2013, and the Circular should be counted for the purpose of qualifying service for pension only as per Rule 5(v) of the Rules, 2013. The appeals were further dismissed by a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India.
Also Read: Supreme Court Updates