Delay in Test Identification & Absence of Motive Fatal to Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man for Murder Tokre Koli or Dhor Koli – Both Stand on Same Legal Footing: Bombay High Court Slams Scrutiny Committee for Disregarding Pre-Constitutional Records Consent Is No Defence When Victim Is Under 16: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Granting Pre-Arrest Bail in Minor Rape Cases Would Send a Harmful Societal Signal: Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail to Accused Citing POCSO’s Rigorous Standards Void Marriage No Shield Against Cruelty Charges: Karnataka High Court Affirms Section 498A Applies Even In Deceptive and Void Marital Relationships Consolidation Authorities Cannot Confer Ownership Or Alter Scheme Post Confirmation Without Due Process: Punjab & Haryana High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Jurisdiction Over Void Post-Scheme Orders Litigation Policy is Not Law, Can’t Enforce Guidelines Through Courts: Rajasthan High Court Refuses to Entertain Quo Warranto Against Additional Advocate General’s Appointment Police and Lawyers Are Two Limbs of Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance in Police Misconduct Incident Sole Testimony, Forensic Gaps, and Withheld Witness: No Conviction Possible: Delhi High Court Affirms Acquittal in Murder Trial Remand Keeps the Dispute Alive – Not Arrears: Bombay High Court Holds SVLDRS Relief Must Be Computed Under Litigation Category Use of ‘Absconding’ in Employment Context Not Defamatory Per Se, But A Privileged Communication Under Exception 7 of Section 499 IPC: Allahabad High Court Daughter’s Right Extinguished When Partition Effected Prior to 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Trial Courts Cannot Direct Filing of Challan After Conviction — Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Directions Against DSP Veer Singh Rule 4 Creates Parity, Not a Parallel Pension Pipeline: Rajasthan High Court Denies Dual Pension to Ex-Chief Justice Serving as SHRC Chairperson Right to Be Heard Must Be Preserved Where Claim Has a Legal Basis: Orissa High Court Upholds Impleadment of Will Beneficiary in Partition Suit Long-Term Ad Hocism Is Exploitation, Not Employment: Orissa High Court Orders Regularization Of Junior Typist After 25 Years Of Service PIL Cannot Be a Tool for Personal Grievances: Supreme Court Upholds Municipal Body’s Power to Revise Property Tax After 16 Years Omission of Accused’s Name by Eyewitness in FIR is a Fatal Lacuna: Supreme Court Acquits Man Convicted of Murder Correction In Revenue Map Under Section 30 Isn’t A Tool To Shift Plot Location After 17 Years: Supreme Court Quashes High Court’s Remand Casteist Abuses Must Be In Public View: Supreme Court Quashes SC/ST Act Proceedings Where Alleged Insults Occurred Inside Complainant’s House Resignation Bars Pension, But Not Gratuity: Supreme Court Draws Sharp Line Between Voluntary Retirement and Resignation in DTC Employee Case

No Pension for Retired Rajasthan Dairy Federation Workers: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On 28 April 2023, Supreme Court of India has ruled, in State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Dr. Hamir Singh Chouhan (Dead) by LRs & Ors., that employees of Rajasthan State Dairy Development Corporation (Dairy Federations) who retired from their jobs between 1999 to 2003 are not entitled to receive pensionary benefits from the State government.

The judgement came in response to a civil appeal filed by the State of Rajasthan against a common judgement and order passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court declaring the respondents to be entitled to receive pensionary benefits in essence by treating their lien to be continuing with the State Government up to the date of their permanent absorption with the Dairy Federations.

The State of Rajasthan had argued that the employees had ceased to have lien with the State Government after they were permanently absorbed in the Dairy Federations and, therefore, they were not entitled to receive pensionary benefits from the State government.

The respondents were initially appointed in the Animal Husbandry Department of Rajasthan and subsequently selected after following due selection process between 1976 to 1978 in the Dairy Federations. They continued to have lien with the parent department/State government as per the relevant G.O. and relevant Rules. They retired as employees of the Dairy Federations between 1999 to 2003 and received retirement benefits from the Dairy Federations.

However, after a period of six to nine years of their retirement from the Dairy Federations, they filed writ petitions before the High Court claiming pensionary benefits from the State government contending that their lien as a government servant in the Rajasthan government service had been continued.

The Supreme Court observed that the appointment orders of the respondents were very clear and they were appointed permanently after due selection, interview, and following the due selection process. The Court noted that there cannot be two liens on two substantive posts and that the respondents ceased to have lien with the State government once they were permanently absorbed and became an employee of the Dairy Federations.

The Court further held that the respondents shall not be entitled to the pensionary benefits from the State government as directed by the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench.

The judgement was delivered by a bench comprising of Justice M.R. Shah and Justice C.T. Ravikumar on April 28, 2023. No costs were imposed in the case.

State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Dr. Hamir Singh Chouhan

Latest Legal News