2 days ago
Calcutta High Court Orders Review of Clerk’s Pension Request
A government clerk wanted to move from the New Pension Scheme to the Old Pension Scheme.
He had previously worked as a peon and then left that job after being selected as a clerk.
The government said he should have used a special process called technical resignation.
It also said he had not disclosed that he had applied for another job.
The clerk argued that he had clearly explained why he was leaving the peon job.
The Calcutta High Court said the rules had not clearly told him to disclose every other job application.
The court also said the authorities had taken an overly strict approach.
It ordered them to look at his request again and explain their decision.
The Calcutta High Court directed authorities to reconsider a lower grade clerk’s request to join the Old Pension Scheme.
The clerk had resigned from a peon post after being selected for the lower grade clerk position.
Authorities rejected his request, saying he had not submitted a technical resignation or disclosed his pending application.
The court found no evidence that the peon appointment order required disclosure of all other job applications.
Authorities must reconsider the request without relying on the technical-resignation issue and issue a reasoned decision within six weeks.
- Who
- A lower grade clerk, the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, and other central government authorities.
- What
- The Calcutta High Court ordered reconsideration of the clerk’s request to be covered by the Old Pension Scheme.
- Where
- The matter was heard by the Calcutta High Court.
- When
- The court’s order was dated September 7; the clerk joined the lower grade clerk post on March 27, 2007, and applied for the pension option on August 8, 2023.
- Why
- The court found that the employee had not been clearly informed that he needed to disclose all pending job applications and that the authorities had applied an overly strict approach.
Employee’s Position
Authorities’ Position
Technical resignation
Employee’s Position
The employee argued that his resignation should be treated as a technical resignation because he stated that he was leaving after being selected for the lower grade clerk post.
Authorities’ Position
The authorities argued that he had resigned directly from the peon post without applying for a technical resignation.
Disclosure requirement
Employee’s Position
The employee maintained that he had explained his reason for resigning and had not been clearly told to disclose all other pending job applications.
Authorities’ Position
The authorities said he should have disclosed his earlier application for the lower grade clerk position when he joined as a peon.
Pension eligibility
Employee’s Position
The employee sought inclusion in the Old Pension Scheme under the one-time option offered to central government civil employees.
Authorities’ Position
The authorities maintained that his failure to follow the required resignation and disclosure procedures meant he remained under the New Pension Scheme.
Key facts
- Court
- Calcutta High Court
- Bench
- Justices Amrita Sinha and Biswaroop Chowdhury
- Employee’s posts
- Peon, followed by lower grade clerk
- Current pension rule
- The employee’s lower grade clerk appointment order placed him under the New Pension Scheme, 2004.
- One-time option
- A March 3, 2023 communication offered eligible central government civil employees a one-time option to join the Old Pension Scheme.
- Earlier legal challenge
- The Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed the employee’s challenge on September 18, 2025.
- Deadline
- Authorities must communicate a reasoned decision within six weeks.
Quotes
Calcutta High Court
The bench hearing the employee’s pension-related petition
“It is common knowledge that an unemployed youth files several applications simultaneously whenever a vacancy notice is published. Getting a job becomes the primary concern. There is no bar to applying for jobs in various departments at the same time. There is always uncertainty with regard to selection in a public recruitment process.”
indianexpress.com
“At the time of joining in the post of peon, the petitioner (employee) was never specifically informed that he ought to have disclosed the details of all other applications for jobs that he made.”
indianexpress.com
Sources
Related news
Supreme Court Rejects Post-Retirement Switch Between Pension Schemes
Supreme Court Rejects Retired Professor’s Post-Retirement CPF-to-GPF Pension Claim
Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of RPF Personnel Over Concealed Cases
DoPT Forwards Pre-2026 Pension Demands to Expenditure Department
Supreme Court Protects Pension After Invalidating ST Certificate
Employee Claims HR Denied ₹50,000 Referral Bonus Over Old Application
Supreme Court Stays Reinstatement in IAS Dog-Walk Row
Supreme Court Sets Aside Compulsory Retirement, Orders Farewell Ceremony
