[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Patna High Court
The Union Of India And Ors vs Subhan on 10 March, 2026
Author: Mohit Kumar Shah
Bench: Mohit Kumar Shah, Arun Kumar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13093 of 2016
======================================================
1. The Union Of India through the General Manager, East Central Railway,
Hajipur, District - Vaishali, Bihar.
2. The General Manager (P) East Central Railway, Hajipur, District- Vailshali,
Bihar
3. The Chief Administrative Officer (CON), East Central Railway,
Mahendrughat, P.S. Pirbahore, Patna
4. The FA & CAO (CON), East Central Railway, Mahendrughat, P.S.
Pirbahore, Patna.
5. The Deputy Chief Engineer (CON), East Central Railway, P.S.-Barkakana,
District Ramgarh, Jharkhand.
6. The Executive Engineer (CON), East Central Railway, P.S. Barkakana,
District Ramgarh, Jharkhand
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Subhan Son of Late Mohamad, Ex Mate, Under Deputy Chief Engineer CON,
East Central Railway, Barkakana, resident of Village- Jarauli, P.O.- Chand
Pipar, P.S.- Kishanpur, District- Saharsa, Supaul Bihar 852105
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Dr. Iti Suman, CGC
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH)
Date : 10-03-2026
We find from the records as also from the order dated
16.12.2025
, passed by this Court in the present case that the
service of notice upon the sole respondent is complete, however
Patna High Court CWJC No.13093 of 2016 dt.10-03-2026
none has chosen to appear before this Court on behalf of the sole
respondent.
2. The present writ petition has been filed by the
petitioners assailing the order dated 13.01.2016 passed by the
learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna
(hereinafter referred to as the 'Ld. CAT') in OA No.050/00471/
2015, whereby and whereunder the petitioners have been directed
to count 50% of the service of the sole respondent as casual labour
and 100% of temporary status followed by regularization as
qualifying service for the pension and accordingly revise the
retiral dues and pension of the sole respondent.
3. At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioners
has referred to a judgment dated 24.03.2017 rendered by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India and Others vs.
Rakesh Kumar and Others (Civil Appeal No. 3938 of 2017 and
other analogous cases), paragraph Nos.55 and 56, whereof are
reproduced herein below:-
"55. In view of foregoing discussion, we hold :
i) the casual worker after obtaining temporary
status is entitled to reckon 50% of his services till
he is regularised on a regular/temporary post for
the purposes of calculation of pension.
ii) the casual worker before obtaining the
temporary status is also entitled to reckon 50% of
casual service for purposes of pension.
Patna High Court CWJC No.13093 of 2016 dt.10-03-2026
iii) Those casual workers who are appointed to
any post either substantively or in officiating or in
temporary capacity are entitled to reckon the
entire period from date of taking charge to such
post as per Rule 20 of Rules, 1993.
iv) It is open to Pension Sanctioning Authority to
recommend for relaxation in deserving case to the
Railway Board for dispensing with or relaxing
requirement of any rule with regard to those
casual workers who have been subsequently
absorbed against the post and do not fulfill the
requirement of existing rule for grant of pension,
in deserving cases. On a request made in writing,
the Pension Sanctioning Authority shall consider
as to whether any particular case deserves to be
considered for recommendation for relaxation
under Rule 107 of Rules, 1993.
56. In result, all the appeals are allowed. The
impugned judgments of Delhi High Court are set
aside. The writ petitions filed by the appellants
are allowed, the judgments of Central
Administrative Tribunal are set aside and the
Original Applications filed by the respondents are
disposed of in terms of what we have held in para
55 as above."
4. Thus, it is pointed out by the learned counsel for the
petitioners that the casual workers after obtaining temporary status
as also before obtaining the temporary status are entitled to reckon
50% of their services till they are regularized on a regular/
temporary post for the purposes of calculation of pension.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the
case and taking into account the aforesaid judgment rendered by
Patna High Court CWJC No.13093 of 2016 dt.10-03-2026
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rakesh Kumar & Ors.
(supra), we find that for the purposes of computing the period of
service of a retired employee for calculation of pension, the same
has to be reckoned only to the extent of 50% of his services till he
was regularized.
6. Accordingly, we direct the petitioners to re-workout
the pensionary claims of the sole respondent as per the law laid
down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in para No. 55 of the judgment
rendered in the case of Rakesh Kumar & Ors. (supra), within a
period of four weeks from today and pay the balance amount to
the sole respondent within a period of four weeks, thereafter.
7. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed
of with the aforesaid modification in the impugned order dated
13.01.2016, passed by the Ld. CAT in OA No.050/00471/2015.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
GAURAV S./-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 17.03.2026
Transmission Date NA
