Back
SUNITA AGARWAL, VIKAS BUDHWAR
State of U. P. – Appellant
Versus
Surendra Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The issue for consideration in these three connected appeals is one and the same. They have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.
2. This intra-Court appeal filed by the State and the Department of Education is directed against the orders of the learned Single Judge wherein the claim of the writ petitioners for including the ad-hoc services rendered by them, before regularization of their service, in the qualifying service, as per the U.P. State Aided Educational Institution Employees Contributory Provident Fund, Insurance Pension Rules' 1964, found favorable consideration. Direction was issued by the learned Single Judge in the judgment impugned to compute pension together with its dues within a time bound period and make payment. In one of the connected matters, the petitioners have been held to be entitled to interest at the rate of 8% from the date of the order till the date of actual payment, in case of failure, to make payment within the time provided therein.
3. The undisputed relevant facts of the matter are that all the writ petitioners herein had been appointed as Assistant Teachers on ad-hoc basis against the substantive vacancies
Ad-hoc services followed by regularization are considered qualifying service for pension under the U.P. State Aided Educational Institution Employees Contributory Provident Fund, Insurance Pension Ru....
Accrued rights to pension cannot be retrospectively revoked, and continuous ad-hoc service qualifies for pension benefits under applicable rules.
Continuous ad-hoc service followed by regularization counts towards qualifying service for pension, and vested rights cannot be retrospectively revoked.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that teachers at State-aided educational institutions in Uttar Pradesh are governed by the Applicable Rules and not the Government Employees Rules.....
Ad hoc services can be considered as qualifying service for pensionary benefits under Rule 25 of the Gujarat Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2002.
The court established that a teacher's continuous absence for five years leads to deemed abandonment of service, allowing for regularisation under specific provisions of the Act.
Delay in issuing regularization orders does not negate legal entitlements to old pension benefits accrued prior to the new pension scheme implementation.
An officiating principal with requisite qualifications and long service is entitled to pension benefits, regardless of the nature of their appointment.
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
