Pension is a legally enforceable right earned through service, and undue administrative delays in disbursement are impermissible and unjust.

JUDGMENT :

GAURANG KANTH, J.

1. In the outset itself, this Court is constrained to express its serious concern over the current state of affairs wherein the integration of updated digital infrastructure, intended to bring about administrative efficiency and transparency, has instead resulted in transitional inefficiencies, thereby temporarily impeding the finalisation of pension benefits for fourth-grade staffs. It is indeed disheartening that those who have devoted decades of their lives in service to the State, particularly Class IV employees, are now being subjected to undue hardship and delay in receiving their rightful dues. Technology is a tool for advancement and should serve as a means to ease the burden of governance upon the citizenry. However, in the present batch of petitions, it appears to have become an obstacle rather than a facilitator. This Court fails to comprehend how a system designed for public welfare can operate in a manner so contrary to its intended objective. The authorities concerned cannot take refuge behind the excuse of a digital transition to justify administrative inaction or lapses.

2. This Court deems it appropriate to remind everyone concerned that pension is not an act of charity, but a legally enforceable right accrued by employees as a result of their long and dedicated service. Each employee earned it through years of honest labor. Any undue delay in the disbursement of pension, especially if occasioned by technological shortcomings or administrative lapses, is impermissible and contrary to the principles of equity, justice, and good governance. It is incumbent upon the State and its instrumentalities to ensure that the deployment of technological systems does not result in hardship or deprivation to entitled beneficiaries.

3. With the above sentiments duly noted, this Court shall now proceed to consider and determine the merits of the present batch of petitions.

Submission on behalf of the Petitioner

4. It is the case of the Petitioner that he was initially engaged as a casual worker in the Respondent Municipality in the year 1988. The services of the Petitioner, in the capacity of ‘Conservancy Worker’ were formally confirmed on 01.01.1988. A service book was prepared in his name, akin to those of other similarly circumstanced employees, and he was extended all service-related benefits, including those under the Assured Career Progression (ACP) scheme.

5. Prior to his superannuation, vide letter dated 06.01.2023, the Chairman of the Respondent Municipality informed the Petitioner that he would retire from service with effect from 31.10.2023 and was accordingly advised to approach the Establishment Section through the Health Department of the Municipality for facilitation of the pension sanction process. By way of the same communication, the Petitioner was directed to furnish his appointment letter, joining report, educational/technical qualification certificates, and birth certificate. The Petitioner, vide communication dated 22.08.2023, informed the Chairman of the Respondent Municipality that he was not in possession of the aforementioned documents. He stated that no appointment letter had been issued to his or to similarly placed individuals. The joining report is in the custody of the Respondent Municipality. Further, as no educational qualification was mandated for the post of ‘Conservancy Worker’, and hence the Petitioner does not possess any academic or technical certificates. Bei