LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/u-p-roadways-retired-officials-and-officers-association-vs-state-of-u-p-anr-20240726/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Civil · Reportable judgment

U.P. Roadways Retired Officials and Officers Association vs State of U.P. & Anr.

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
26 July 2024
Case No.
Civil Appeal No. 894 of 2020
Result
Dismissed
Bench
Hrishikesh Roy, Prashant Kumar Mishra
Citation
[2024] 7 S.C.R. 1368 : 2024 INSC 555
Acts & Sections
Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950 U.P. Civil Service Regulations Roadways (Abolition of Post and Absorption… Road Transport Corporation Employees (other… U.P. State Road Transport Corporation…
Supreme Court Reports [2024] 7 S.C.R. 1368 : 2024 INSC 555
Issue for consideration
Whether the appellants who were the former employees of Uttar Pradesh Roadways, a temporary department of the State Government, held any pensionable post before or after their absorption in the U.P. State Roadways Transport Corporation; whether the members of the Roadways Karmchari Sanyukta Parishad (RKSP) who were promoted after the cut-off date of 27.08.1982 were entitled to pension.
Headnote

Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950 – U.P. Civil Service Regulations – Article 350 – Roadways (Abolition of Post and Absorption of Employees) Rules, 1982 – Road Transport Corporation Employees (other than officers) Service Regulations, 1981 – Regulations 4, 39 – U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Employees (other than Officers) Service Regulations, 1981 – Pension – When not entitled to – Appellants, if held pensionable posts and thus, entitled for receiving pension:

Held: No – Appellants are not entitled to pension as per GO dated 28.10.1960 as they were neither holding permanent posts in the Roadways nor holding any pensionable posts – Appellants were not covered under Article 350 of the Regulations as amended to hold the pensionable posts inasmuch as despite amendment in the first part of Article 350 of the Regulations, Note 3 thereof did not suffer amendment which provides that service in non-gazetted posts in Government Technical and Industrial Institutions in Uttar Pradesh does not qualify in the case of persons appointed to such posts on or after 15.11.1938 – Roadways is a Technical and Industrial Institution, thus, the appellants are covered under Note

3 of Article 350 and hence, not entitled for pension – Pension is a right and not a bounty – However, it can be claimed only when permissible under the relevant rules/scheme – If an employee is covered under the Provident Fund Scheme and is not holding a pensionable post, he cannot claim pension nor can writ court issue mandamus directing the employer to provide pension to an employee not covered under the rules – Appellants having received retiral benefits including the benefit under the Employees Provident Fund Scheme cannot claim pension – A party to the litigation cannot be permitted to approbate and reprobate – Reliance on the judgments of the High Court in Mirza Athar Beg, S.M. Fazil and Shri Narain Pandey misplaced – Only State Government employees absorbed in the Corporation shall be entitled to pension – Employees of Roadways who were not holding any pensionable post prior to their deputation or absorption in the Corporation are not entitled to pension, as their service conditions in the erstwhile Roadways did not provide that they are entitled to pension – Members of the RKSP promoted after the cut-off date of 27.08.1982 are not entitled to pension. [Paras 29, 35, 40, 49]

Keywords: Service Law · Pension · Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (UPSRTC) · State Roadways Transport Corporation · Uttar Pradesh Roadways · Non-gazetted posts · Deputation · Absorption · Temporary department · Temporary employees Permanent posts · Pensionable post · Provident Fund Scheme · Employees Provident Fund Scheme · Contributory Provident Fund Scheme · Approbate · Reprobate · Government orders · Non-gazetted posts · Government Technical and Industrial Institutions · Roadways · Cut-off date

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Divya Pandey. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

Judgment Prashant Kumar Mishra, J. Delay condoned in filing SLP(C) Diary No. 10240 of 2020 and leave granted. 2. Abatement is set aside and applications for substitution are allowed. Application(s) for intervention is allowed. 3. By this common judgment a batch of civil appeals arising out of the common order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in different writ applications and special appeals is disposed of. 4. Civil Appeal No. 894 of 2020 preferred by UP Roadways Retired Officials and Officers Association is taken as the lead case. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 894 OF 2020 5. In th
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

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.

All SC judgments →