Gauhati High Court Directs Assam Government to Form Committee for Pension-Like Benefits to PWD Workers
The Gauhati High Court has issued a significant directive to the Assam government, ordering the formation of a high-level committee to devise a scheme providing financial benefits in lieu of pension for retired work-charged and muster roll employees of the Public Works Department (PWD) who have rendered over two decades of service. This decision comes after the court dismissed a petition by 13 such retirees seeking pension under existing rules but recognized their long-standing contributions.
Court's Observations on Pension as a Fundamental Right
In a hearing presided over by Justice Soumitra Saikia on January 30, 2026, the court emphasized that pension is neither a bounty nor a matter of grace dependent on an employer's discretion. Quoting a Supreme Court verdict, the bench stated, "It is a payment for the past service rendered." The court further elaborated that pension serves as a crucial social welfare measure, ensuring socio-economic justice for employees who have dedicated their productive years to public service.
The judgment highlighted that pension aligns with constitutional goals, providing security for individuals unable to support themselves in old age. This perspective underscores the court's view of pension as an essential retirement benefit, rather than a discretionary grant.
Details of the Petition and Court's Ruling
The petition was filed by 13 retired PWD employees appointed between 1993 and 1996 as work-charged staff across various divisions in Assam. They served uninterruptedly until their superannuation between 2018 and 2021, performing duties similar to regular Grade-III and Grade-IV employees. Despite receiving regular pay scales, being transferred, and having formal service records, they were denied pension upon retirement due to not being regularized against sanctioned posts.
Senior Advocate P K Goswami, representing the retirees, argued that the state cannot benefit from its own failure to regularize employees after decades of service. He cited Assam government memorandums from 1996 and 2003, which state that temporary employees completing 20 years of continuous service are eligible for pension, even without permanent confirmation.
However, Additional Advocate General P Nayak, for the Assam government, contended that pension under Rule 31 of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969, requires employment against a sanctioned post. He relied on the 2017 division bench judgment in State of Assam v. Upen Das, which held that work-charged and muster roll employees are not entitled to pensionary benefits.
Court's Directive for a New Scheme
While the court acknowledged it was bound by the Upen Das ruling and thus rejected the petitioners' plea for pension under the 1969 rules, it did not leave the matter unresolved. Recognizing the workers' decades of service, the bench directed the Assam government to:
- Constitute a high-level committee headed by an officer of the rank of additional chief secretary.
- Include senior officers from the PWD, finance, personnel, and law departments in the committee.
- Formulate a concrete scheme within three months to provide financial benefits in lieu of pension for the petitioners and similarly placed employees.
The chief secretary has been tasked with ensuring compliance, marking a proactive step toward addressing the retirees' grievances.
Broader Implications and Legal Context
This case sheds light on the persistent issue of exploitation faced by government employees in non-regularized positions, who often work for extended periods without job security or retirement benefits. The Supreme Court has previously emphasized that initial employment status should not bar pension entitlements for long-serving employees.
The Gauhati High Court's decision underscores the need for equitable treatment of workers who have contributed significantly to public service. By ordering the creation of a new scheme, the court aims to balance legal precedents with humanitarian considerations, ensuring that retirees receive some form of financial support in their old age.
This ruling may set a precedent for similar cases across India, where temporary or contract workers seek pension benefits after prolonged service. It reinforces the principle that pension is a right earned through service, not a discretionary gift from the state.
