GDS service cannot be reckoned as qualifying service for pension under CCS (Pension) Rules.

The applicant served as a Gramin Dak Sevak (GDS) in the Department of Posts from November 1981 until October 2013

Following a promotion, he joined the regular cadre of Multi-Tasking Staff (MTS) on October 11, 2013

He superannuated on July 31, 2022, after rendering 8 years, 9 months, and 20 days of regular service as MTS

Since the minimum qualifying service for a statutory pension under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 is ten years, the respondents denied him pensionary benefits, treating him as a subscriber to the New Pension Scheme (NPS) effective from his 2013 appointment

The applicant sought to reckon his 32-year GDS tenure toward his qualifying service for pension

1. Whether the period of service rendered as a Gramin Dak Sevak (GDS) can be reckoned along with regular MTS service to determine qualifying service for pension under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 (now 2021)

Rule 3-A and Rule 6 of the Department of Posts, GDS (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, 2011, which establish that GDS are part-time employees "outside the Civil Service of the Union" and are expressly ineligible for pension

Rule 2 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, which restricts the application of the defined pension scheme to government servants appointed substantively to civil services on or before December 31, 2003

The Tribunal followed the Supreme Court’s holding in Union of India v. Gandiba Behera (2021) 14 SCC 786, which ruled that GDS service cannot be factored into qualifying service for pension in regular posts

The Tribunal reasoned that GDS positions are fundamentally different from regular civil posts because they are part-time (maximum five hours daily) and require the incumbent to have independent sources of income

Under Rule 3-A of the 2011 GDS Rules, such service is explicitly excluded from the Civil Service of the Union

The Tribunal observed that the applicant’s regular appointment as MTS occurred in 2013; therefore, under Rule 2 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, he is governed by the NPS, not the 1972 pension rules

Applying the precedent in Gandiba Behera, the Tribunal held that even though the applicant faced a "marginal shortfall" in the ten-year requirement, the judiciary lacks the jurisdiction to bridge this gap by "importing" non-pensionable GDS service into a pensionable tenure

The Tribunal noted that GDS and MTS cadres are governed by distinct service rules with different employment characteristics

The court affirmed that because the applicant’s regular service commenced after January 1, 2004, he is correctly covered under the NPS, and the service rendered as GDS—being part-time and governed by separate rules—cannot be reckoned for pensionary purposes under the CCS (Pension) Rules

No order as to costs was made