Service law – Odisha Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1992 – r.18 (6) – Pensionary benefits – Computation, of employees employed as a ‘Job Contractor’ – Only such period of their service as ‘Job Contractors’ to be counted for pensionary benefits as was sufficient to entitle them for pension or the entire period of Job Contract Employment – Order passed by the Single Judge of the High Court that the entire service period be counted for calculation of pension of Job Contract employees – Writ appeals thereagainst by the State – Dismissed due to inordinate delay in filing the appeals – Challenge to: Held: Order of the Single Judge of the High Court not sustainable – Unable to grant relief to respondents-Job Contract employees that has been granted by the Court to work-charged employees – Under the 1992 Rules, clear distinction between the work-charged establishment and job contract establishment, however, the 1992 Rules and the distinction under the law not challenged before any Court – Thus, not in a position to give a finding as to whether the distinction between the two is artificial, being only a difference of nomenclature, and also whether effectively, they both are performing regular work – Nevertheless, the State has been pursuing these cases in extreme careless and lethargic manner – Delay caused by them is inexcusable – Thus, the State to pay cost of Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand to the employees concerned in cases belatedly filed. [Paras 10, 14, 16, 18, 20]
Odisha Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1992 – r.18 sub rule 3 and 6 – Work charged employees and job contractors – Distinction between:
Held: Work-charged employees are those who have worked in the establishment for a period of five years or more without interruption and are subsequently appointed to the same or another post in temporary or substantive capacity in a pensionable establishment, the period of service rendered by him/her in a work-charged establishment to qualify for pension under the Rules – As regards the job contract employee, after he/she is brought in pensionable establishment, only that much period as job contract service to be added to regular service as would make him qualify or eligible for pensionary benefits. [Para 15]
Deprecation – Inordinate delay – Procedural lapses by State authorities and Land Records office Surveys Office – Matters handled in a careless, casual and lethargic manner both in the High Court and before this Court, causing inordinate delay, which was never explained in any satisfactory manner – Thus, the State to pay Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand, to the employee concerned. [Paras 3, 20]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.