Punjab and Haryana High Court Orders Pension for Widow Based on 17 Years of Temporary Service
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled in favor of a widow whose husband was denied pension benefits by the Punjab Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL). The court quashed departmental orders that excluded 17 years of the deceased employee's temporary service from his qualifying service period. The employee had worked on a work-charge basis from 1987 to 2004 before being regularized as an assistant lineman. He voluntarily retired in 2010, but PSPCL claimed he only had six years and ten months of regular service, falling short of the ten-year minimum required for a pension. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar observed that continuous temporary service, if not contingency-based, cannot be ignored when computing pensionary benefits. Citing established legal precedents, the court rejected the argument that pre-regularization service is ineligible. This judgment ensures that long-serving temporary employees receive their due retirement benefits, acknowledging their total service duration of over 23 years. The decision highlights the legal protection of workers' rights against administrative technicalities that undermine social security entitlements for families of deceased government employees.
Wire timeline
Punjab and Haryana High Court Orders Pension for Widow Based on 17 Years of Temporary Service
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled in favor of a widow whose husband was denied pension benefits by the Punjab Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL). The court quashed departmental orders that excluded 17 years of the deceased employee's temporary service from his qualifying service period. The employee had worked on a work-charge basis from 1987 to 2004 before being regularized as an assistant lineman. He voluntarily retired in 2010, but PSPCL claimed he only had six years and ten months of regular service, falling short of the ten-year minimum required for a pension. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar observed that continuous temporary service, if not contingency-based, cannot be ignored when computing pensionary benefits. Citing established legal precedents, the court rejected the argument that pre-regularization service is ineligible. This judgment ensures that long-serving temporary employees receive their due retirement benefits, acknowledging their total service duration of over 23 years. The decision highlights the legal protection of workers' rights against administrative technicalities that undermine social security entitlements for families of deceased government employees.
The Indian Express