HC upholds withdrawal of pension, protects retired employee from recovery of pension already paid
Photo used for indicative purpose only. Source internet
Shimla, Sept 6
Himachal Pradesh High Court has upheld the withdrawal of pensionary benefits of a retired employee who was permanently absorbed in a government department after being taken on secondment, while protecting him from recovery of pension already paid on the ground that there was no misrepresentation on his part.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice G.S. Sandhawalia and Justice Bipin Chander Negi passed the order on August 27, 2026, while dismissing an appeal filed by the legal representatives of Dhani Ram in Dhani Ram (deceased) through LRs v. State of Himachal Pradesh and others.
Dhani Ram had initially been appointed as a peon/chowkidar in the Himachal Pradesh State Handicrafts and Handloom Corporation at Arki in 1979 and was regularised in 1985. He was subsequently selected as a Clerk in the Department of Social, Women and Scheduled Castes Welfare on secondment in January 2003.
The court noted that the State Government had framed a policy in 2012 for permanent absorption of surplus staff taken on secondment. Under the policy, pensionary benefits were to be governed by the applicable State Government instructions. The employee gave his consent for absorption and obtained a No Objection Certificate from his parent organisation. He was eventually permanently absorbed as a Clerk in June 2013.
After retiring as a Junior Assistant from the office of the District Welfare Officer, Bilaspur, on March 31, 2015, pension was sanctioned in his favour. However, the authorities later found that the pension had been wrongly granted and withdrew it with effect from May 1, 2018.
The High Court held that his parent organisation was governed by the EPF/New Pension Scheme and not the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Therefore, his case was covered by the 2012 absorption policy and the pension withdrawal was legally justified.
At the same time, relying on the Supreme Court judgment in State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih, the court observed that there had been no misrepresentation by the employee in securing pension and the benefit already paid to him could not be recovered.
The Division Bench dismissed the appeal as well as pending miscellaneous applications.
About the Author
