"Denied Pension? The Legal Battle of Anjani Kumar Choudhary for Justice"

 


Introduction

This case revolves around Anjani Kumar Choudhary, a retired employee of S.S.V. College, Kahalgaon, under T.M. Bhagalpur University, who sought proper pension benefits by including his prior service as a daily wage employee. His legal battle led to the Patna High Court, where the court reviewed the legitimacy of his claims and directed further action.

Background of the Case

Anjani Kumar Choudhary was initially appointed as a Demonstrator in the Department of Physics at S.S.V. College, Kahalgaon, on November 1, 1976. However, after the college was taken over by T.M. Bhagalpur University, his services were not absorbed into the regular system. In 1988, the university recognized his work and directed salary payments on a daily wage basis from June 1, 1988.

In 2001, the university advertised for regular Class-III positions. Choudhary applied, passed the selection process, and was officially appointed on July 5, 2002. Later, his service was formally absorbed into the university through an order dated May 27, 2006, with an effective absorption date of June 5, 2003. He retired on December 31, 2012.

The Legal Issue

Choudhary filed a writ petition in 2017 (Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2967 of 2017) before the Patna High Court, demanding that:

  • His entire period of service, from his initial appointment in 1976 (or at least from 1988), should be considered while calculating his pension and post-retirement benefits.

  • He should receive financial benefits similar to other employees who were regularized from their initial appointment dates.

Arguments Presented

Petitioner’s Arguments:

  1. He worked continuously in the college since 1976 and was officially recognized in 1988 when he was placed on daily wages.

  2. Many similarly placed employees were granted pension benefits by counting their entire service period from their initial appointment, citing past High Court rulings.

  3. Court judgments in similar cases (e.g., Rajendra Kamti v. L.N. Mithila University and Jwala Prasad Singh v. T.M. Bhagalpur University) ruled in favor of employees seeking pension benefits for pre-regularization service.

  4. Staffing Pattern Rule: The university must consider service from the date an employee starts working if they were eventually regularized.

University & State’s Arguments:

  1. Choudhary’s initial appointment was against an unsanctioned post, and his salary payments from 1988 were only as a temporary worker.

  2. His official employment on a sanctioned post only began on July 5, 2002, making earlier claims invalid.

  3. Other similar petitions were dismissed (e.g., C.W.J.C. No. 14510/2015 and C.W.J.C. No. 14487/2015), setting a precedent against his claim.

  4. As per Bihar University rules, pension is calculated only for service on sanctioned posts, and temporary or daily wage work does not qualify.

Court’s Analysis & Decision

The Patna High Court, after examining the facts and legal precedents, made the following observations:

  1. Verification Needed: The university must verify whether Choudhary had worked continuously from 1976 or 1988 before his regularization.

  2. Pension Rules Apply:

    • Only service on a sanctioned post qualifies for pension.

    • However, courts have allowed counting pre-regularization service for pension in certain cases.

  3. Precedents Considered: The court reviewed past judgments where employees in similar positions received pension benefits by considering their pre-regularization service.

  4. Directives: The court did not outright accept or reject Choudhary’s claims. Instead, it directed him to:

    • File a fresh representation before the Vice-Chancellor of T.M. Bhagalpur University within four weeks.

    • The Vice-Chancellor must investigate and verify Choudhary’s claims in light of past legal rulings and respond with a reasoned decision within eight weeks.

Conclusion

The case of Anjani Kumar Choudhary highlights the complexities in pension calculations for employees who transition from daily wage to permanent status. While the court did not grant immediate relief, it ensured that Choudhary’s claims would be reviewed fairly. This decision is significant for other employees in similar situations, as it reinforces the importance of proper documentation, legal precedents, and procedural fairness in pension disputes.

Read the full judgement Below;

https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/MTUjMjk2NyMyMDE3IzEjTg==-0AChagDqufg=