Regularisation of service from 01.07.2003 disentitles employees from claiming benefits under the Old Pension Scheme.

The appellants were engaged as daily wage employees in the Public Works Department (PWD) in January and March 1993.

Their services were regularized by the Government with effect from 01.07.2003 upon completion of 10 years of service, a policy they accepted at the time.

Ten years after regularization, the appellants submitted representations seeking inclusion under the "Old Pension Scheme" and the opening of General Provident Fund (GPF) accounts, arguing their service should be reckoned from the completion of 10 years of daily wage service.

The respondents rejected the claim because regularization occurred after the implementation of the New Pension Scheme (Contributory Pension Scheme).

The Writ Court subsequently dismissed their petitions (W.P. Nos. 12952 & 12949 of 2024).

1. Whether the appellants are entitled to be covered under the Old Pension Scheme based on the date they completed 10 years of daily wage service, rather than the formal date of regularization.

2. Whether mere eligibility for regularization under a government policy confers a vested right to backdated benefits or a specific pensionary scheme.

Regularization of daily wage employees is a concession granted by the Government and not an inherent right.

Eligibility criteria, such as the completion of 10 years of service, do not automatically confer a right to regularization from a retrospective date.

The pension scheme applicable to an employee is determined by the date of official regularization of service, which in this case fell under the era of the Contributory Pension Scheme (New Pension Scheme).

The Court reasoned that the appellants' service was formally regularized on 01.07.2003, and this order had attained finality as it was accepted by the appellants without protest for over a decade.

The Court rejected the argument that completion of 10 years of daily wage service should be the reckoning date for pensionary benefits, clarifying that "mere eligibility" under a policy does not equate to an entitlement.

Since regularization is a concessional act by the State, the terms of such regularization (including the effective date) govern the benefits. Because the effective date of 01.07.2003 was post-implementation of the New Pension Scheme, the appellants could not claim benefits under the defunct Old Pension Scheme.

The High Court upheld the Writ Court's order, finding no merit in the appellants' claim for retrospective application of the Old Pension Scheme and dismissed the Writ Appeals.