Administrative Inaction Cannot Defeat Pension Rights for Long Temporary Service

(Postal Temporary Group ‘D’ Case)

📌 Soma Devi & Ors. v. Union of India

(CWP No. 3241/2016, decided on 21.11.2025)

⚖️ The Himachal Pradesh High Court has delivered a strong indictment of administrative inaction, holding that the department cannot deny pensionary benefits by relying on its own failure to regularise service.

🔴 Core Issue – Administrative Lapses:

Late Mehar Chand was granted temporary status and worked full-time for over 20–23 years, discharging duties identical to regular Group ‘D’ staff.
The Postal Department never issued a formal regularisation order, despite decades of continuous service.
The Court held that an employee cannot be punished for the employer’s inaction.
Keeping an employee “temporary” for decades was termed a deliberate and exploitative administrative practice aimed at denying pension.

🛑 Strong Judicial Observations:

The State cannot take advantage of its own wrong or inaction.
Long and uninterrupted service cannot be nullified due to absence of formal orders.
Pension is a constitutional and social welfare right, not a discretionary favour.
Denial of pension on technical grounds, when the fault lies with the administration, is arbitrary and unconstitutional.

📚 Legal Foundation:

Reliance on Jagrit Mazdoor Union v. MTNL (1990) — long temporary service cannot be ignored for pension.
CAT criticised for adopting a hyper-technical approach and ignoring substantive justice.

✅ Final Directions:

CAT order set aside.
Late Mehar Chand held entitled to regularisation and pension.
All consequential benefits to be paid to legal heirs.

📢 Clear Message:

👉 Administrative delay, negligence, or deliberate inaction cannot be used to defeat earned pensionary rights.

Administrative Inaction Cannot Defeat Pension Rights for Long Temporary Service - Postal Temporary Group ‘D’ Case