Custodial Death | Pendency Of Criminal Trial No Bar For Awarding Compensation Under Public Law Remedy: Gauhati High Court Suit For Possession Under Section 6 Specific Relief Act Barred If Filed Beyond Six Months Of Dispossession: Madras High Court Subsequent Purchaser Is Representative Of Judgment Debtor, Separate Suit Challenging Execution Sale Barred Under Section 47 CPC: Kerala High Court Statutory Bail Restrictions Melt Down When Pre-Trial Detention Is Prolonged & Trial Is Unlikely To Conclude Soon: Delhi High Court Failure To Apprise Accused Of Right Under Section 50 NDPS Act Vitiates Search & Recovery: J&K & Ladakh High Court Section 12(5) Arbitration Act Inapplicable To Proceedings Commenced Before 2015 Amendment; Executing Court Can't Apply Neutrality Norms Retrospectively: Punjab & Haryana High Court Banks Can Share Sale Proceeds Of Secured Assets Outside Liquidation Estate With Homebuyers Under Compromise Agreement: Kerala High Court Private Rights Must Yield To Public Interest: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs Removal Of Encroachments On Public Road Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Re-Agitate Factual Disputes Or Seek Re-Hearing On Merits: Allahabad High Court Recovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act Vitiated If Police Already Present At Spot Before Arrival Of Panch Witnesses: Bombay High Court Mere Non-Compliance Or Delay In Procedure Under Section 52A NDPS Act Is An Irregularity, Not An Illegality Entitling Accused To Bail: Calcutta High Court Recovery Of Weapon Used In Commission Of Offence Not A Sine Qua Non For Conviction If Ocular Evidence Is Corroborated: Allahabad High Court Seized Vehicles Shouldn't Be Kept Idle To Rot In Police Stations, Utility Vanishes Due To Stagnation: Karnataka High Court Or 39 CPC | Trial Court Erred In Dismissing Injunction Application Despite Respondent's 'No Objection' To Restraining Share Transfer: Gauhati High Court Issuing NBW Merely For Absence Of Accused Already On Bail Is Improper; Liberty Cannot Be Dealt With Lightly: Orissa High Court 138 NI | Expert Examination Of Disputed Documents Essential For Just Adjudication If Complainant Denies Handwriting & Signatures: Rajasthan High Court Order 41 Rule 27 CPC Cannot Be Invoked To Fill Lacunae In Evidence If Party Voluntarily Closed Evidence In Trial Court: Delhi 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

Latest Legal News