$~60 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 2065/2024&CM APPL. 8603/2024 TIJIYA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Chirayu Jain, Ms. Raksha Awasya, Advs., Adv. Tanishqua Dhar versus DELHI BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS BOARD .....Respondent Through:

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

O R D E R

% 26.11.2025

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, and Section 22 (1) (b) of the Building and other Construction Workers Act, 1996 seeks the following prayers:-

“a. Quash and set aside the impugned order with (illegible) date passed by the Section Officer (West) in the present case against the Petitioner rejecting her application for pension under the Building and Other Construction Workers Act, 1996;

b. Direct the Respondent Board to release the Pensionary dues of the Petitioner with penal interest @18% per annum;

c. Direct the Respondent Board to initiate and conduct the inquiry against all the errant officers and employees, whether permanent or contractual, as under Delhi (Right to Citizens to Time Bound Delivery of Services) Act, 2011;

d. Direct the Respondent to pay costs;

Pass any other order or grant any other relief as it may deem fit.

FOR THIS ACT IF KINDNESS THE PETITIONER AS IN DUTY BOUND TO EVER PRAY.”

3. Petitioner, who used to work as coolie, was registered with respondent- Board with registration No. 5170691825 which was renewed subsequently, by online registration as 51380000056205. The petitioner had since been regularly renewing her registration each year as per Building and other Construction Workers (Registration of Employment and Condition of Service) Act, 1996, (for short, ‘BOCW Act’). The petitioner got superannuated on 31.12.2021 and submitted her application for pension on

09.01.2023.

4. The application for pension of the petitioner was dismissed by respondent-Board vide the impugned order stating that she has not completed at least 3 years of continuous registration immediately before attaining the age of superannuation, i.e., 60 years, as online labour card was issued to her on 30.03.2020, i.e., after a gap of 1 year and 9 months, from the date of her retirement. It was stated that Section 14(2) of BOCW Act, if a person had been beneficiary for at least three years continuously immediately before attaining the age of 60 years, then, he/she shall be eligible to get such benefits as may be prescribed. It was on this ground the application for pension of the petitioner was rejected.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Dulari Devi v. Delhi Building and Other Construction Workers Board & Anr., 2023: DHC: 001341, and an order dated 02.05.2025 in W.P.(C) 758/2024 titled as “Kishan Lal v. Delhi Building and Other Construction Workers Board & Anr.”, to contend that in similar petitions it was held that the only eligibility criteria for payment in pension is found in Rule 272 of the Building and other Construction Workers (Registration of Employment and Condition of Service) Rules, 2002, which provides that a member who has been working as building worker for not less than one year after commencement of these rules, shall on completion of sixty years of age be eligible for pension.

6. Notice was issued to the respondent on 13.02.2024 and two weeks’ time was given for filing counter affidavit. Thereafter, on 22.07.2025 before learned Registrar, learned counsel for the respondent had submitted that they did not wish to file any counter affidavit.

7. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

8. Learned Coordinate Bench in Kishan Lal (supra) has observed and held as under: -

“4. The short issue which arises for consideration is whether the petitioner, a construction worker, was entitled to pension under the provisions of BOCW Act and the rules framed thereunder, i.e. The Delhi Building and other Construction Workers (Regulation of Em