SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(All) 2174

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Ashwani Kumar Mishra, Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi, JJ.
State of U P and Others – Appellants
Versus
Mahesh Chandra Sharma and Another – Respondents
Special Appeal Defective No. - 976 of 2023
Decided On : 24-01-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : C.S.C., C.S.C.
For the Respondent: Indra Raj Singh

Accrued rights to pension cannot be retrospectively revoked, and continuous ad-hoc service qualifies for pension benefits under applicable rules.

Headnote:(A) U.P. Secondary Education (Services Selection Board) Act, 1982 - Section 33G - Pension Rules - Claim for pension based on ad-hoc service prior to regularization - The court upheld the right to count ad-hoc service towards qualifying service for pension, emphasizing that the respondent's continuous service and subsequent regularization entitled him to pension benefits. (Paras 2, 5, 11, 19)

(B) Vested Rights - The court reiterated that accrued rights cannot be retrospectively taken away, referencing Supreme Court precedents on the protection of vested rights. (Paras 10, 18)

Facts of the case:
The respondent was appointed as an L.T. Grade Teacher on ad-hoc basis in 1993, later regularized in 2016. His claim for pension based on prior ad-hoc service was initially rejected but was allowed by the Single Judge.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the respondent's ad-hoc service should be counted towards qualifying service for pension, affirming the Single Judge's decision.

Issues: The main issues were whether the respondent's ad-hoc service could be counted for pension and the implications of subsequent amendments to pension rules.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the respondent's continuous service and the provisions of the Pension Rules justified counting his ad-hoc service towards pension eligibility, rejecting the State's argument regarding non-confirmation of service.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

ORDER :

Order on Delay Condonation Application

1. Heard Sri Neeraj Tripathi, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Ankit Gaur, learned counsel for the State and Sri Adarsh Singh and Sri Ajeet Singh, learned counsels for the respondent.

2. Reasons for delay in filing the special appeal have been satisfactorily explained. Delay Condonation Application is consequently allowed. Office is directed to treat the appeal as having been filed within time. Regular Number would be allotted to the appeal.

Order on Appeal

1. Heard Sri Tripathi in support of the appeal on merits and Sri Adarsh Singh on behalf of the respondents.

2. Learned Single Judge vide the order under challenge has directed the appellant to process the claim of respondent/petitioner for payment of pension by counting his ad-hoc services rendered on the post of Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade, prior to his regularization in accordance with Section 33G of the U.P. Secondary Education (Services Selection Board) Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1982).

3. Undisputed facts of this case are that the respondent/petitioner was appointed as L.T. Grade Teacher on ad-hoc basis in Kisan Inter College, Taharpur, Amroha vide order dated 14.01.1993. The ad-hoc appointment was against a short term vacancy. This appointment of respondent was approved by the District Inspector of Schools, Moradabad on 18.09.1993. The respondent was allowed to continue as L.T. Grade Teacher in the institution and all benefits of service were extended to him. The short term vacancy got converted into substantive vacancy. The Act of 1982 was amended vide U.P. Act No. 7 of 2016, as a result of which a teacher appointed in terms of the amended provision was held entitled to regularization. Section 33G of the Act of 1982, providing for such course is reproduced hereinafter:

    "33-G. Regularisation of certain more appointments against short term vacancies-Any teacher, other than the Principal or the Headmaster, who-

    (a) was appointed by promotion or by direct recruitment in the lecturer's grade or trained graduate grade on or after August 7, 1993, but not later than January 25, 1999 against a short term vacancy in accordance with paragraph 2 of the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Services Commission (Removal of Difficulties) (Second) Order, 1981, as amended from time to time, and such vacancy was subsequently converted into a substantive vacancy:

    (b) was appointed by promotion or by direct recruitment on or after August 7, 1993, but not later than December 30, 2000 on adhoc basis against substantive vacancy in accordance with Section 18, in the Lecturer grade or Trained Graduate grade;

    (c) possesses the qualifications prescribed under, or is exempted (c from such qualification in accordance with, the provisions of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921;

    (d) has been continuously serving the institution from the date of such appointment up to the date of the commencement of the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Services Selection Board (Amendment) Act, 2016;

    (e) has been found suitable for appointment in a substantive capacity by the selection committee referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (2) of Section 33C in accordance with the procedure prescribed under clause (b) of the said sub-section;

    shall be given substantive appointments by the Management.

    (2)(a) The names of the teachers shall be recommended for substantive appointment in order of seniority as determined from the date of their appointment;

    (b) If two or more such teachers are appointed on the same date, the teacher who is elder in age shall be recommended first.

    (3) Every teacher appointed in a substantive capacity under sub-section (1) shall be deemed to be on probation from the date of such substantive appointment.

    (4) A teacher who is not found suitable under sub-section (1) and a teacher who is not eligible to get a substantive appointment under the said subsection shall cease to hold the appointment on such date as the State Governm

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    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

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top