Temporary employee died in harness deserves to be treated as regular: Central Administrative Tribunal

Ramkrishan Upadhyay

Advertisement

Chandigarh, May 24

In a significant judgment, the Chandigarh Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has directed the UT Administration to give all retiral benefits to the wife of a temporary employee who died while in service.

The Bench stated that a temporary employee who had rendered more than 31 years of service before he died in harness deserved to be treated as ‘regular’ for all intents and purposes. Consequently, his wife was held entitled to the retiral benefits accrued to her on the death of her husband.

Tara Devi had challenged the decision of the Home Department of the Chandigarh Administration dated February 2, 2021, vide which her application for the release of family pension and other benefits like gratuity and leave encashment of her deceased husband was junked.

In the application filed through counsel KB Sharma she had stated that her husband Kishan Lal had joined the Hospitality Department, UT, as a sweeper on a daily-wage basis. He was granted ‘temporary’ status later. Her husband continued to work in the department and but his services were not regularised despite vacancies. His request for regularisation of his services was rejected on the grounds that he did not fulfil the requisite qualification.

The applicant stated that apart from his retiral benefits, the department did not pay his salary for the month of March, 2017, to his family.

On the other hand, the department claimed that that the applicant’s husband was working against non-sanctioned post and his services were not regular.

After hearing of the arguments, the Bench observed that in view of the mandate given by the Supreme Court in the case of Jagrit Mazoor, which had been followed by CAT while allowing identical cases of Jaswinder Kaur and Dalibir Kaur, it was held that the deceased employee, who had rendered more than 31 years of service before he died in harness, deserved to be treated as ‘regular’ for all intents and purposes.

Consequently, the applicant was held entitled to the retiral benefits accrued to her after the death of her husband. However, the arrears of family pension are restricted to three years preceding the filing of the original application, the Bench observed.