Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 3196

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member
Rajan Sharma – Appellant
Versus
U.T. of J&K Through Commissioner/ Secretary to Govt. State Sports Council – Respondent
Original Application No. 1257/2024 | Original Application No. 243/2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. M.I. Sherkhan
For the Respondents: Mr. Rajesh Thapa, ld. AAG, Ms. Anshuja Tak, Ms. Anshuka Tak

Pension is statutory right available only under service rules; employees accepting non-pensionable terms cannot claim post-retirement; parity not automatic across organizations; policy decisions for executive, not courts.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Service jurisprudence - Pensionary benefits - Retired employees of registered society under administrative control of government, directly appointed to non-pensionable posts, cannot claim pension as matter of right after accepting service conditions for decades - Pension payable only if provided under statutory rules governing service - Parity not claimable with employees of other boards/corporations having different recruitment patterns - Policy matters like pension schemes within executive domain, courts/tribunals not to interfere unless arbitrary or unconstitutional - Internal proposals/communications do not create enforceable right. (Paras 14, 15, 16, 17, 18)

(B) Limitation - Delay and laches - Stale claims after long delay not entertainable.

Facts of the case:
Retired employees of Sports Council, appointed to posts like groundmen, chowkidar, jamadar, sought quashing of order rejecting pension/family pension claims, alleging discrimination with employees of other government-controlled boards/corporations, reliance on internal communications, proposals for pension fund since 2006, and parity with other states' sports councils; respondents contested on grounds of non-pensionable service rules, acceptance of conditions, no parity, delay/laches, and policy domain.

Findings of Court:
Applications not maintainable as no statutory right to pension under accepted non-pensionable rules; issue requires policy consideration; directed respondents to place matter before competent authority for final policy decision within four months.

Issues: Whether retired employees of society with non-pensionable service rules entitled to pension on parity/analogy with other organizations; validity of rejection order; effect of internal proposals on enforceability.

Ratio Decidendi: Pension is statutory right payable only under relevant rules; employees accepting non-pensionable conditions estopped from post-retirement claim; no automatic parity based on duty similarity; courts defer to executive on policy/service benefits unless unconstitutional; proposals under examination not enforceable.

Result: Original Applications disposed of with directions to consider policy decision; no costs.

Table of Content
1. factual background of retired sports council employees' service. (Para 1 , 3 , 6 , 7 , 11 , 12 , 14)
2. applicants seek pension parity with other boards. (Para 2 , 8 , 9 , 10)
3. respondents deny pension due to non-pensionable rules. (Para 4)
4. pension requires statutory rules; no post-retirement alteration. (Para 15 , 16 , 17)
5. no automatic parity in service benefits across organizations. (Para 18 , 19)
6. direct policy consideration without granting pension rights. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)

ORDER

Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member

1. The applicant has filed the present Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs: -

In view of the aforementioned facts the Applicants pray for the following relief(s):-

(i). Quashing the Government order No.32 JKYS&S of 2024 dated 27.08.2024 being illegal arbitrary, malafide contrary to rules and may also quashing the supports council's rules 1979 and also other rules of 1979 which are not applicable to the employees of J&K Sports Council and may also quashing the amended rules of 1992 from time to time being violative of the article 14, 16 & 21 of the constitution of India, and may quashing rules of 2017 along with other SRO, Notification of Government order which is discriminatory against the pension of petitioners.

(ii). Commanding the respondents pensionary benefits to provide the benefits/family pension to the petitioners being the on superannuation/ retirement employees of J&K state Sports Council in view of Sports Council Letter/Communication No. 605/2017 dated 23.08.2017, Communication dated 14.03.2018, letter dated 28.03.2018 and also in view of letter dated 09.06.2023, of Kerla State Sports Council and Mizoram State Sports Council and also in view of letter dated 16.05.2024 and also in view of SC, Judgment Titled D.S.Nakara, versus Union of India, (1983) (111)SC 305 and also in view of SC, Judgment passed in case Titled Chairman and M.D. ,K,S,R,T,C V/S K.O.Varghese & in para 12 to 20, and also in view of Judgment passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Jammu and Kashmir in SWP No.1269/2016 and connected writ petition No.469/2018 decided on 31.07.2018, SWP No. 1250 of 2002 titled J&K Industries Employees Association Vs. State of J&K and others, SWP No. 1468/2004,SWP No. 945/2002,SWP No. 27/2003 and SWP No. 78/.2003 and SWP No.143/2007 and also in view of J&K CSR extending retirement and pensionary benefits and also on the pattern of Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgments and some of them have been mentioned in the above said judgments And may also commanding the respondents to consider the case of the applicants on the pattern and analogy of Govt. Order No.230-IND of 2017 dated 26.09.2017, and may Commanding the respondents to provide the pensionary benefits retrospectively along with family pension on the analogy of Sports Council of Punjab, Chandigarh, Orissa, Sport Council of Nagaland, Pondicherry, Himachal Sport council of Tamilnadu, Pradesh, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Assam, West Bengal and also in view of J&K Sports Council communication dated 28.07.2023 issued vide No. SC/1712-II/4287-88 dated 28.07.2014 and also in view of letter of Mizoram Sports Council dated 09.06.2023. May commanding the respondents to treat the applicants as government ser government employee and provide pension on the pattem and analogy of youth and sports services department employee having same nature of work and job of the duty for providing physical exercise to the students and public and also treat the applicants to the employees of youth and sports services department.

(iii). Commanding the respondents applicants/ Petitioners as Government Servant being subordinate of Youth and Sports services and to provide the pensionary benefits retirement benefits/family pension to the petitioners on superannuation/being the employees of J&K Sports Council on the pattern/analogy of YSS, and sports Council employee /Corporation employees and a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 3196

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALRajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial MemberRajan Sharma – AppellantVersusU.T. of J&K Through Commissioner/ Secretary to Govt. State Sports Council – RespondentOriginal Application No. 1257/2024 | Original Application No. 243/2025

Pension is statutory right available only under service rules; employees accepting non-pensionable terms cannot claim post-retirement; parity not automatic across organizations; policy decisions for executive, not courts.

Cases Referred (2)

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member
Rajan Sharma – Appellant
Versus
U.T. of J&K Through Commissioner/ Secretary to Govt. State Sports Council – Respondent
Original Application No. 1257/2024 | Original Application No. 243/2025