The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has ordered Maharashtra authorities to release pension, arrears and 12% annual interest to two retired college head clerks after ruling that the refusal of their pension claims was illegal.
A division bench of Justices Urmila Joshi-Phalke and Raj D Wakode quashed communications issued by the joint director of higher education, Amravati division, which had rejected the pension proposals of Krushnarao Deorao Gaigole and Narendra Wamanrao Lande. The court directed the authority to release the benefits within eight weeks.
Gaigole retired from a college in Washim district on December 31, 2020, after serving for more than 28 years and one month. Lande retired from a college in Amravati district on March 31, 2022, after completing 30 years and seven months of service.
According to the petitions, the joint director returned both pension proposals on the ground that the two employees had entered service through direct recruitment. The state argued that head clerks were required to be appointed through promotion under Rule 3 of the Standard Code of 1984 and that the two employees were therefore not entitled to pensionary benefits.
The bench noted that the authorities had not questioned the appointment procedure before the employees retired. Their salaries had also been approved by the joint director during their service. On that basis, the court held that the subsequent refusal of pension could not be sustained.
The judgment relied on Supreme Court rulings that recognise pension as a right. The bench also held that the employees’ claims were supported by the doctrine of legitimate expectation, which protects a benefit that an authority’s established conduct has led a person to reasonably expect.
The court described it as “very unfortunate” that a person could be denied legitimate dues after rendering service for almost three decades. It said the state should ensure that retired employees are not compelled to approach the court for benefits to which they are entitled.
The bench also linked retirement benefits to the livelihood of employees after superannuation. It observed that any illegal action affecting those benefits would be unconstitutional. The ruling places responsibility on the education administration to resolve service and pension issues before an employee retires, rather than leaving the matter to prolonged litigation.
The joint director of higher education, Amravati division, must now release pension to both petitioners along with arrears and interest at 12% per annum within the eight-week period ordered by the court.
