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

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 3934

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
S. Sujatha, J, Sanjiv Kumar, Member(A)
Bharathi – Appellant
Versus
Joint Secretary (Silk), Ministry of Textiles, Government of India – Respondent
OA Nos.170/00469/2024 | 170/00607/2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri Sampangi Ramaiah
For the Respondents: Shri Vishnu Bhat

The benefits of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 are restricted to Central Government employees appointed prior to 01.01.2004; therefore, dependents of casual labourers granted temporary status on or after 01.01.2004 are not eligible for family pension under said rules.

Headnote:(A) Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) Scheme, 1993 - CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 - Applicability of benefits to casual workers - Deceased employee granted temporary status w.e.f. 19.03.2005 - Whether dependent entitled to family pension under 1972 Rules and compassionate appointment - Temporary status granted post 01.01.2004 - Held, CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 applicable to employees appointed before 01.01.2004 are not applicable to the applicant’s case - Family pension already being received under EPF Scheme - Compassionate appointment claim rejected as deceased was not a regular employee. (Paras 15, 17, 18)

Facts of the case:
The applicant, widow of a Skilled Farm Worker who held temporary status from 19.03.2005, sought compassionate appointment and family pension claiming her late husband's service should be deemed regularized. The respondents contended that regularization was blocked due to a ban on filling posts, and the employee was not covered by the 1972 Pension Rules.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the employee’s temporary status commenced on 19.03.2005, falling outside the eligibility period for CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. The applicant already receives benefits under the EPF Scheme.

Issues: Whether the spouse of a deceased temporary status employee is entitled to family pension under CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and compassionate appointment when temporary status was granted after 01.01.2004.

Ratio Decidendi: An employee or their dependent cannot claim the benefit of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 if the temporary status was conferred on or after 01.01.2004, as these rules regulate retirement benefits specifically for employees appointed prior to that date.

Result: Original Applications disposed of pending outcome of higher court proceedings.

Table of Content
1. consolidation of oas concerning common relief claims for family pension and compassionate appointment. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. parties argument regarding regularization, applicability of pension schemes, and eligibility for benefits. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. establishment of the date of temporary status conferment (19.03.2005) via judicial orders. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. non-applicability of ccs (pension) rules, 1972 to employees with temporary status post-2004. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
5. refusal of compassionate appointment for dependents of non-regularized employees subject to pending litigation. (Para 18 , 19 , 20)

ORDER

Per: Justice S.Sujatha ...........Member(J)

Since common and akin issues are involved, both the OAs are clubbed and heard together and disposed of by this common order.

2. The reliefs claimed are as under:

OA No.469/2024

(i) Issue an Order in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing the Impugned Office Order bearing No.CSB 2(3)/93-Labour (Vol.XIV) [12/01] dated 03.10.2023 (Annexure-A6) passed by the Respondent Board; and

(ii) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, directing the Respondents Board to consider the Applicant's prayer for appointment on compassionate ground to the widow of Late N.Pillappa, Ex SFW(T.S) by treating his service as deemed regularized as Group-D employee in accordance with DOPT OM dated 10.09.1993 (Annexure-A2) and Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment dated 29.11.1989. (Annexure A1); and

(iii) Pass any such other orders or issue such other directions as this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit in the facts & circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.”

OA No.607/2024

(i) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, directing the Respondents Board to consider the Applicant's prayer for grant of family pension and consequential benefits as are admissible to regular Group-D employee by treating the services of deceased N.Pillappa as deemed regularized as Group-D employee on the date of his death in accordance with DoPT OM dated 10.09.1993 and Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment dated 29.11.1989; and

(iii) Pass any such other orders or issue such other directions as this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit in the facts & circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.”

3. Briefly stated the facts as narrated by the applicant are that the applicant’s husband late Shri N.Pillappa was a Skilled Farm Worker (Temporary Status) working at Seri-Biotech Research Laboratory, Central Silk Board, Bangalore. He was conferred with Temporary Status with effect from 01.07.2015 as per Government of India Scheme of 1993 (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularisation of Casual Labourer), modified by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka as 19.03.2005. He expired in harness on 20.02.2023 after having served the organization for about 36 years which includes about 8 years service with temporary status. The applicant being illiterate, after coming to know that her husband was working as Skilled Farm Worker with temporary status, she is entitled to receive family pension and other pensionary benefits from the date of death of her husband as she is getting a meagre pension from Employees Provident Fund Scheme, she submitted an application dated 12.08.2024 before the 2nd Respondent seeking family pension, in addition to representations dated 15.09.2023 and 21.09.2023 with a request to provide compassionate appointment. The request of compassionate appointment was rejected vide impugned order dated 03.10.2023 (Annexure A6), but there was no response to the request made for family pension. Being aggrieved, by the inaction of the respondents in not responding to her request for family pension, the applicant has preferred OA No.607/2024. Aggrieved by the rejection order regarding compassionate appointment, applicant has preferred OA No.469/2024.

4. Learned Counsel Shri Sampangi Ramaiah repres

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