Supreme Court Strikes Down Expulsion of Bihar MLC as Disproportionate, Orders Immediate Reinstatement Private Banks Not Subject to Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226: Punjab & Haryana High Court Mere Allegation of Forgery is Not Enough: Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Partition Dispute When a Case is Made Out for Bail, Courts Should Not Hesitate: Kerala High Court Allows Bail Despite Commercial Quantity of Drugs Seized Retailers Cannot Be Prosecuted for Manufacturer’s Fault" – Karnataka High Court Quashes Case Against Pesticide Dealers Mere Issuance of a Cheque Does Not Prove Legally Enforceable Debt": Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal in Cheque Dishonor Case Courts Cannot Ignore Urgent Repairs When Public Safety is at Stake: Calcutta High Court Upholds Trial Court's Order Mutation Entries Do Not Confer Ownership: Bombay High Court Rejects Premature Dismissal of Partition Suit No Substantial Question of Law – High Court Cannot Re-Appreciate Evidence Under Section 100 CPC: Andhra Pradesh High Court Injunction Cannot Be Granted Without Proof of Possession: Allahabad High Court Quashes Relief in Land Dispute Section 197 CrPC | Sanction for Prosecution is a Shield, Not a Sword: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case Against BIS Officer Landlord is the Best Judge of His Needs: Supreme Court Orders Eviction in Favor of Landowner Vijaya Bank TT Scam | Supreme Court Acquits Jeweller in ₹6.7 Crore Vijaya Bank Fraud Case, Orders Return of 205 Gold Bars Procurement Preference for Small Enterprises is a Legal Mandate, Not a Mere Policy: Supreme Court Rules in Favor of MSMEs Revisional Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked Against Interlocutory Orders of Commercial Courts: Orissa High Court Declares Section 8 Bar Absolute Victim’s Testimony Must Be of Sterling Quality to Be Sole Basis of Conviction: Kerala High Court Reduces Sentence of Pastor Convicted for Repeated Rape of Minor Providing Set-Top Boxes to Subscribers Constitutes Sale”: Karnataka High Court Upholds VAT on Tata Play Limited Mere Registration of FIR Cannot Justify Denial of Passport Renewal: Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court

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

Similar News