Back
S. N. PATHAK
Maya Devi, wife of Late Shankar Kachhap – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.N. PATHAK, J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioners have approached this Court with a prayer for quashing of the part of the orders of appointment dated 15.10.2019, 17.10.2019 and 18.10.2019, whereby although the respondents have accepted the services of the petitioners in regular establishment, but treating them as fresh appointees have deprived the petitioners from getting pensionery benefits. Hence, the petitioners have prayed for a direction upon the respondents to count their services from the date of their initial engagement i.e. from the year 1988-89 and thereafter, release the arrears of salary on the basis of calculation of their services from the date of their initial engagements and also extend the pensionery benefits to them.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioners were engaged as daily rated employees by the respondents in the year 1988-1989. Thereafter they continued in services, and finally they were terminated in the year 1996 and 1997. The termination of services of the petitioners was against the provisions of Section 25 F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, that is without any notice and without any requisite payment
Prior service as work-charged employees must be counted towards qualifying service for pension, ensuring compliance with principles of fairness and non-discrimination.
Continuous service of 40 years as a daily wager entitles the petitioner to pensionary benefits from the date of initial appointment, not from the date of regularization.
Pension is a right earned for past services and should not be denied arbitrarily. It is a deferred payment for past services and is not a bounty or charity.
Service rendered as a daily wage worker must be counted for pension and gratuity benefits upon regularization, ensuring non-discrimination and fairness.
Inaction by the State in not regularizing long-serving employees cannot deprive them of valid pension benefits under existing rules, irrespective of completed qualifying service requirements.
State delays in regularizing services do not justify withholding pension benefits for long-serving employees; equal treatment and fair engagement practices must be upheld.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of pensionary benefits for employees appointed prior to a certain date and subsequently regularized, as well as the requirement to ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
