Employee Can't Be Denied Pension Citing 'Break In Service' If Absence Was Regularized As Extraordinary Leave : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that pensionary benefits cannot be denied to a retired government employee whose unauthorized absence from duty was treated as extraordinary leave, leading to the regularization of their service.

The Court said that if despite the employee's prolonged absence from the service, his service is regularized during the period of absence by treating his absence as extraordinary leave, then the absence cannot be considered as a 'break in service' to deny pensionary benefits.

“In our considered view, having once regularized her service during the period of absence by granting extraordinary leave, it cannot be held that the said period can be treated as break in service.”, the court observed.

The bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Prashant Kumar Mishra heard the case where the Appellant, a retired govt. employee was prevented from signing the attendance register and performing her duties, leading to her absence.

Despite multiple legal proceedings, no departmental inquiry was conducted, and her service was eventually regularized by treating her absence as extraordinary leave.

The appellant sought pension and retiral benefits, which were denied on the grounds that her absence did not qualify as service for pension purposes.

Following the State Administrative Tribunal's and High Court's decision to not grant pensionary benefits, the Appellant approached the Supreme Court.

Setting aside the impugned decisions, the judgment authored by Justice Mishra observed that the Appellant cannot be denied her pensionary benefits because once the appellant's service was regularized by treating her absence as extraordinary leave, it could not be treated as a break in service for denying pension.

The Court observed that the respondent's claim of the Appellant's unauthorized absence had to be substantiated by them by leading a departmental inquiry.

Because the Respondents failed to conduct a departmental inquiry, the Court found it unjust to place the burden of proving her absence on the Appellant.

“The respondents' failure to conduct an inquiry as per Tribunal's order cannot shift the burden on the appellant to prove that she was prevented from working. Denial of pensionary benefits to an employee must emanate from any rule enabling the government for such denial. When the services have been regularized by treating the same as extraordinary leave the same cannot be treated as unauthorised leave for denying the pensionary benefits. The respondents could have denied the pension to the appellant by proving that she was unauthorizedly absent for the subject period and not by refusing to hold an inquiry against her.”, the court observed.

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, directing the respondents/authorities to finalize the appellant's pension within a period of three months.

Case Title: JAYA BHATTACHARYA Versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 252

Click here to read/download the judgment

Appearance:

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rahul Arya, Adv. Mr. Madhav Bhatia, Adv. Mr. Rohit Amit Sthalekar, AOR

For Respondent(s) Ms. Mantika Haryani, Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR Mr. Bhanu Mishra, Adv.