Srinagar, Nov 17: The High Court of J&K and Ladakh has declined any pensionary benefits to the retired employees of J&K State Road Transport Corporation (JKSRTC) while holding that the employees appointed by the Corporation were not entitled to the same at par with the government employees.
Setting a single-judge verdict, a division bench comprising Justices, Sanjeev Kumar and Wasim Sadiq Nargal, revealed that they do not uphold the view of the writ Court that the writ petitioners though appointed in the Corporation are entitled to retiral benefits like pension and gratuity.
The court pronounced the judgment in two appeals filed by the government challenging single bench judgment wherein the court held the writ petitioners entitled to all retiral benefits on a par with and on the analogy of section of employees of Corporation who were earlier the employees of erstwhile Government Transport Undertaking (GTU) .
The court had also drawn analogy from the similarly situated employees of JK Industries who too had been held entitled to pensionary benefits by the court.
“Having found the writ petitioners not similarly situated with the class of employees of the erstwhile GTU, who were given fresh opportunity to make option in the year 1986, we are convinced that the view of the Writ Court holding the writ petitioners entitled to pensionary benefits, more particularly when the JKSRTC Service Condition Rules and Regulations, 1979 applicable to the writ petitioners declare their service ‘non-pensionable’, is totally erroneous and unsustainable,” the bench stated while allowing the appeals.
The court stated that it cannot issue a mandamus to the Corporation to provide or not to provide a particular service benefit.
While taking note of the 1979 Regulations, the court recorded that the employees appointed to the Corporation (Corporation borne employees) were not entitled to superannuation pension.
“They, however, are entitled to certain other post-retail benefits in lieu of pension,” the court stated.
To mention, the bench underscored that the Corporation is also free if it so chooses to provide any service benefits to its employees including pension by acting strictly within the mandate of the Central Road Transport Corporation Act 1950 and rules and regulations framed thereunder by the Corporation.
“We, however, do not countenance the issuance of writ of mandamus to the official respondents to necessarily concede the request of the Corporation, nor do we uphold the view of the writ Court that the writ petitioners though appointed in the Corporation and by the Corporation are entitled to retiral benefits like pension and gratuity on a par with the government employees serving in other Government Departments,” the court stated during the judgment.
