Continuous temporary-status service under Rule 154(a) qualifies for pension despite no formal regularisation.

The applicant was engaged as a Contingency Paid Chowkidar in the Department of Posts on 06.09.1986 and was granted temporary status on 10.07.1991.

During his service, he received various benefits, including leave, annual increments, bonus, LTC and GPF deductions.

In 2022, he was appointed/promoted as MTS on the basis of seniority-cum-fitness against the vacancy year 2022 and joined on 31.10.2022.

He retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.01.2023 after approximately 36 years of continuous service.

His representation seeking pension and retiral benefits was not decided, leading to the present application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

The respondents contended that the applicant had remained a daily-wage/contingency-paid worker, was granted only temporary status, and had never been formally regularised in the Group ‘D’ cadre.

They therefore disputed the counting of his service prior to appointment as MTS for pensionary purposes.

Whether the applicant’s uninterrupted service as a Contingency Paid Chowkidar, followed by temporary status and subsequent appointment as MTS, could be treated as regular service for pensionary and other retiral benefits despite the absence of a formal order of regularisation in the Group ‘D’ cadre?

Whether Clause 154(a) of the Post and Telegraph Establishment Manual entitled the applicant to be treated as a regular employee and to receive pension and other post-retiral benefits?

Whether the applicant was entitled to interest on delayed pensionary and retiral benefits?

The Tribunal applied Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, under which the applicant invoked the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.

It relied principally on Clause 154(a) of the Post and Telegraph Establishment Manual, which provides that selected categories of whole-time contingency-paid staff, including Chowkidars, working alongside regular employees or work-charged staff, should be brought on the regular establishment and treated as “regular employees”.

The Tribunal followed Union of India v. Shyam Lal Shukla, Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 60272 of 2009, Allahabad High Court, decided on 23.12.2011, holding that Clause 154(a) confers regular-employee status for pensionary purposes even without a formal regularisation order.

It also relied on Chandi Lal v. Union of India, O.A. No. 917/2004, CAT Allahabad, affirmed by the Allahabad High Court and the Supreme Court, where continuous service, temporary status and treatment as a Group ‘D’ employee were held sufficient to support entitlement to pension despite the absence of formal regularisation.

The Tribunal found that the applicant was not merely an intermittent daily-wage worker: he had been granted temporary status in 1991, continued uninterruptedly for approximately 36 years, received several employment-related benefits, and was ultimately appointed/promoted as MTS before retirement.

Applying Clause 154(a), the Tribunal held that the absence of a separate formal regularisation order could not defeat the substantive consequence of the applicant having worked continuously as a category of staff covered by the provision.

The reasoning in Shyam Lal Shukla and Chandi Lal supported treating such service as regular for pensionary purposes where the department had accepted the employee’s continued service and had not alleged any break or unsatisfactory performance.

The respondents’ objection was therefore considered technical and insufficient to deprive the applicant of pension and retiral benefits.

The respondents were directed to pay the applicant pension and all other admissible retiral benefits, together with simple interest at 6% per annum from the date the amounts became due until actual payment, within three months of receiving a certified copy of the order, if the benefits had not already been paid.

The claim for 12% interest was not granted, and there was no order as to costs.

All connected miscellaneous applications were disposed of.