‘Unfortunate that employee was deprived of pensionary benefits for 56 years’: HC asks Punjab to disburse pension benefits to man who retired in 1964 | Chandigarh News
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has termed it “unfortunate” that a man was denied pensionary benefits for 56 years, despite completing the qualifying service. Justice Sudeepti Sharma ruled in favour of Punjab State Transport Department employee Ram Lal Prabhakar, granting him pensionary benefits from the date of his resignation’s acceptance on July 7, 1964.
The case stemmed from Prabhakar’s petition challenging a 2001 civil court decision that dismissed his plea for pension. An appellate court upheld the dismissal in 2003.
Prabhakar joined the Punjab State Transport Department on May 18, 1948, as a permanent employee in a pensionable post. He was deputed to the Punjab State Small Industries Corporation on November 21, 1962. His deputation ended on October 30, 1963, but he was neither recalled to his parent department nor absorbed permanently by the corporation.
In December 1963, Prabhakar wrote to the corporation expressing his willingness to forego pensionary benefits if absorbed. However, he was neither absorbed nor reinstated, forcing him to resign effective June 19, 1964, with his resignation accepted on July 7, 1964.
The petitioner argued that the courts below misinterpreted Rule 3.17, dismissing his suit and appeal on the ground of limitation. He contended that pensionary benefits constitute a recurring cause, making limitation inapplicable. The state counsel, however, defended the lower courts’ decisions and cited Rule 3.17(A)(1)(5) to argue that Prabhakar was not entitled to pensionary benefits.
Justice Sharma observed that Prabhakar’s letter expressing willingness to forego pensionary benefits was contingent on absorption, which never materialised. She held that the letter could not be used as estoppel against his pension rights.
The court noted that Prabhakar served in a pensionable post for 14 years from 1948 to 1962 before his deputation and completed 16 years of service by the time his resignation was accepted in 1964. As the qualifying service for pension at the time was 10 years, Prabhakar met the criteria.
The judgment emphasised that pensionary rights cannot be denied to individuals in pensionable service, stating that the respondent department’s actions violated established rules. Justice Sharma directed the state to grant Prabhakar his long-overdue pension.
