Supreme Court Holds Services Rendered as Contractual/Casual Employee Not Counted for Pensionary Benefits
In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India held that services rendered as a contractual or casual employee cannot be counted for the purpose of calculating qualifying service for pensionary or retiral benefits. The judgment came in the case of Director General, Doordarshan Prasar Bharti Corporation of India & Anr. v. Smt. Magi H Desai, where the appellant challenged a High Court decision that allowed the respondent’s contractual services to be counted as temporary service for pension calculations.
The Division Bench of Justices M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar observed that Rule 13 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, clearly states that qualifying service commences from the date of substantive, officiating, or temporary appointment. The court emphasized that casual or contractual service cannot be equated with temporary service, and only services rendered in a substantive or temporary capacity can be considered as qualifying service.
In the judgment, Justice Shah remarked, “The High Court has materially erred in observing that the services in temporary capacity will include the classes of temporary service such as casual or even contractual. The question is not whether the services rendered by a contractual employee would be qualified as service in a temporary capacity. The question is, whether, in fact, such contractual employee rendered the services as temporary or not.”
The court further pointed out that the respondent’s claim for counting 50% of her services rendered as a casual or contractual employee lacked any statutory provision to support it. While the respondent cited similar schemes in other departments, the court clarified that the absence of such a scheme in the appellant’s department, Doordarshan Prasar Bharti Corporation of India, prevented her from claiming the same benefit.
Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment and restored the order of the Tribunal, which had dismissed the respondent’s original application seeking pensionary benefits for her casual/contractual services. The court concluded that the respondent’s services rendered before her regular appointment on March 31, 1995, could not be considered for pension calculations.
The judgment reinforces the distinction between temporary and casual/contractual services in determining qualifying service for pensionary benefits. It clarifies that only services rendered on a substantive or temporary basis, as recognized by the rules and relevant schemes, can be counted towards pension calculations.
Date of Decision: March 24, 2023
Director General, Doordarshan Prasar Bharti Corporation of India & Anr. vs Smt. Magi H Desai
