Jharkhand High Court: Employee Reinstated After Retrenched Will Be Treated To Be In Service Since Date Of Initial Appointment For Pension
The Jharkhand High Court dismissed an Appeal filed by the BCCL, thereby upholding the Single Bench’s decision regarding the entitlement of the Respondent to pension.
The Jharkhand High Court held that an employee reinstated after being retrenched will be treated as in service from the date of their initial appointment for the requirement of pensionable service.
The Court dismissed an Appeal filed by M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. (BCCL), thereby upholding the Single Bench’s decision regarding the entitlement of the Respondent (employee) to pension. The Court rejected the Appellants' contention that the Respondent had not completed the qualifying period of service for the grant of pension.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice MS Ramachandra Rao and Justice Rajesh Shankar held, “The respondent no. 1 could not work for the qualifying period only because he was not allowed to work by the appellants. If he had been allowed to work, the requirement of 120 months of contribution towards pension would have also been fulfilled. Moreover, on perusal of the impugned order passed in W.P.(S) No. 31 of 2021, it would be evident that the respondent no. 1 is ready to deposit his contribution as well as the amount paid to him as one time pension.”
Advocate Anoop Kumar Mehta appeared for the Appellants, while Advocate Saibal Mitra represented the Respondents.
Brief Facts
The Respondent had initially filed a Petition, seeking a direction to the Appellants to fix and pay his pension, contending that he had completed the qualifying period of 10 years of pensionable service and was entitled to pension under the CMPS 1998. The Single Bench allowed the Petition, directing the Appellants to fix and pay the Respondent's pension. The Single Bench also directed the management of BCCL to consider the Respondent's claim regarding the refund of the amount which he had received under Para 10(4) of the CMPS 1998.
Court’s Reasoning
The High Court noted, “So far as non-deposit of the contribution towards pension is concerned, the award was passed on 21.02.1992 directing the management to reinstate the respondent no. 1 and other retrenched workmen in service w.e.f. 22.12.1983, however the management complied the said award only on 12.07.2014 by permitting the respondent no.1 to join the post of General Mazdoor (Surface) Category-I. Thus, due to the own fault of the appellants, the respondent no.1 could not complete ten years of pensionable service. There is a well-known maxim “commodum ex injuria sua nemo habere debet” which means that no one should get benefit of its own wrongdoing.”
The Court noted that Para 2(g) of the CMPS 1998 states that "pensionable service means the service qualifying for pension as provided in the scheme." It found that the Respondent had "completed 9 years, 10 months and 28 days of service in the Coal Industry on the date of his superannuation" and "completed the age of 60 years on 30.09.2011."
“In view of the discussions made hereinabove, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge in directing the appellants to fix pension of the respondent no. 1, however, the direction issued to the management of BCCL to consider the claim of the respondent no. 1 regarding refund of the received amount by him as per requirement so as to extend the pensionary benefits appears to be needless. Once it was held that the respondent no.1 was entitled to be paid the pension, there was no need to direct the appellants to consider the claim of the petitioner which otherwise will be an empty formality as the respondent no.1 will merely knock his head against the impenetrable wall of prejudged opinion of the appellants,” the Court held.
Consequently, the Court ordered, “Hence, the respondent no.1 is directed to deposit his contribution towards pension for qualifying period along with the amount of Rs. 44,350/- paid to him under para 10(4) of the CMPS 1998 with the appellants within four weeks from the date of passing of this order and on receipt of the same the appellants shall forward it along with their contribution to CMPFO. The CMPFO shall thereafter fix and pay pension along with the arrears to the respondent no.1 within one month from the date of receipt of the said contribution.”
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Appeal.
Cause Title: M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. & Ors. v. Kailash Chandra Mukherjee & Anr. (Neutral citation: 2025:JHHC:12675-DB)
Appearance:
Appellants: Advocate Anoop Kumar Mehta
Respondents: Advocates Saibal Mitra and Prashant Kumar Singh
