Service Law:
Pensionary benefits – Claim of – Respondent working as pharmacist in the State Health Services on regular basis, tendered his resignation – Acceptance of resignation, however respondent not granted pension and service benefits but only gratuity and Provident Fund – Suit by respondent seeking pensionary benefits – Suit decreed and issuance of direction to the appellant to pay pensionary benefits – Said order upheld by courts below – On appeal, held: In case of resignation from service or a post, unless the matter was covered u/r.26(2) of the Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, it would entail forfeiture of past service – Since the past service would stand forfeited, the same would be excluded from the period of qualifying service, and as such for deciding the entitlement to pension, the employee would not have the qualifying period of service – Thus, the order passed by the courts below is set aside – However, amount made over to respondent would not be recovered from him – Punjab Civil Services Rules – r. 7.5(1) – Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules – r. 26.
Disposing of the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 In case of resignation from service or a post, unless the matter was covered under Rule 26(2) of the Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, it would entail forfeiture of past service. Since the past service would stand forfeited, the same would be excluded from the period of qualifying service, and as such for deciding the question of entitlement to pension, the employee would not have the qualifying period of service. [Para 9][843-B, C]
1.2 The counsel for the appellant is absolutely right on the scope and interpretation of Rule 7.5(1) of the Rules. The respondent did not seriously contest the matter on the scope and interpretation of Rule 7.5(1) of the Rules. The judgment and order passed by the High Court is set aside and the suit is dismissed. The amount made over to the respondent in May, 2018, after the judgment of the High Court, would not be recovered from him, but no further payments would be released or paid to the respondent. [Paras 10, 11][843-D-G] Union of India and others v. Braj Nandan Singh (2005)
8 SCC 325 : [2005] 4 Suppl. SCR 356 - referred to.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. 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.