Allahabad High Court Upholds Pension Rights for Long-serving Temporary Employees

Court strikes down restrictive state ordinances, affirming pension entitlements for work-charge and temporary staff

In a landmark judgment, the Allahabad High Court, under Justice Manish Mathur, has ruled in favor of pension rights for employees who have served on a work-charge or temporary basis before regularization or superannuation. The judgment, dated November 4, 2025, in the case of Jai Ram Sharma v. State of U.P., addresses multiple writ petitions challenging state ordinances that denied pension benefits to such employees.

The court examined the applicability of the U.P. Qualifying Service for Pension and Validation Act, 2021 and the U.P. Entitlement to Pension and Validation Ordinance, 2025, against the backdrop of the Supreme Court’s decision in Prem Singh v. State of U.P. (2019). The judgment emphasized that services rendered by employees on work-charge or temporary engagements must be counted as qualifying service for pensionary benefits.

Justice Mathur highlighted the exploitative nature of work-charge employment, where employees are engaged for long durations without the security of permanent appointments. The court noted that the state’s ordinances attempted to sidestep the Supreme Court’s directives by denying pension rights to employees engaged irregularly but not illegally. It reiterated the Supreme Court’s stance that pension is a vested right, not a bounty, earned through years of service.

The court struck down the provisions of the state ordinances that excluded such employees from pension eligibility, deeming them contrary to established legal principles and constitutional rights under Article 14. It underscored the need for the state to prioritize the welfare of its citizens over exploitative labor practices.

This decision is a significant affirmation of employee rights, ensuring that those who have dedicated decades of service in temporary capacities are recognized and rewarded with pensionary benefits. The judgment mandates the state to quash its previous orders denying these benefits and implement the court’s directives within a stipulated time frame.

The ruling is expected to impact numerous employees across Uttar Pradesh who have been waiting for recognition of their service towards pension entitlements. It also sets a precedent for addressing similar issues in other jurisdictions, emphasizing the principle of equitable treatment for all employees, irrespective of the nature of their initial engagement.

Bottom Line:

The judgment deals with the entitlement of pension and pensionary benefits for employees engaged on work-charge or temporary basis and later regularized, or superannuated without regularization - It discusses the applicability of the U.P. Qualifying Service for Pension and Validation Act, 2021 and the U.P. Entitlement to Pension and Validation Ordinance, 2025, in light of previous judgments, notably Prem Singh v. State of U.P. [(2019) 10 SCC 516] - The court ruled that such employees are entitled to pensionary benefits as their service qualifies for pension, and provisions of Ordinances/Acts that exclude their service as qualifying for pension are contrary to established legal principles and constitutional rights.

Statutory provision(s): U.P. Qualifying Service for Pension and Validation Act, 2021, U.P. Entitlement to Pension and Validation Ordinance, 2025, Article 14 of the Constitution of India, Prem Singh v. State of U.P. [(2019) 10 SCC 516]

Jai Ram Sharma v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(Lucknow) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2804569