Long-Serving Employees Can't Be Denied Pension Just Because Their Posts Weren't Reflected On I-OSMS Portal: Calcutta HC

Background Facts

The Petitioner, along with 147 other similarly situated employees, was appointed as a Class IV employees by the Municipality during the period 1991–1992, with the approval of the competent authority. The Petitioners were absorbed against a post which was not a sanctioned post in accordance with the staffing pattern prescribed for Municipalities. The Petitioner superannuated from service on 31.10.2023. All 148 employees had continuously worked with the Respondent Municipality for a period of approximately 30–35 years and have received monthly salaries. All of them were treated as permanent employees of the Municipality for all purposes and were granted benefits available to permanent employees.

However, the pension and retiral benefits were not released to the Petitioners on the ground that their details cannot be entered into the i-OSMS portal, as they were not shown to be working against any sanctioned post. The respondents contended that the retiral benefits could be released to the Petitioners only upon their re-designation as 'Conservancy Workers' and the consequent updating of their service details in the i-OSMS portal. The Municipality, through various letters, requested the Director, Local Bodies, to re-designate the 148 Class IV employees as Conservancy Workers. The Director, Local Bodies, vide letter dated 15.05.2024, sought additional documentation and the Municipality submitted all the available documents. The Director, Local Bodies, re-designated six similarly situated employees as Conservancy Workers, whereupon their pension and other retiral dues were released.

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the writ petition.

It was contended by the Petitioner that pension and retiral benefits were released to other Coolies who had retired prior to the implementation of the i-4 OSMS system. However, due to the technical transition to the system, employees like the Petitioner were facing financial hardships due to nondisbursal of retiral dues.

On the other hand it was contended by the respondent (Director, Local Bodies) that although the Petitioner was absorbed as a Coolie, the post was not a sanctioned post in accordance with the staffing pattern prescribed for Municipalities. Therefore, the Petitioner and other similarly placed persons were categorised as 'unapproved employees' in the i-OSMS portal. It was further stated that the re-designation proposal was incomplete, as the Municipality failed to submit details of the "man in position" in respect of all Group-D employees as on the date of the proposed re-designation. It was further contended that it was not feasible to determine the availability of vacant sanctioned posts of Conservancy Worker without this information.

Findings of the Court

It was observed by the court that the only impediment in redesignating the Petitioners and other similarly situated persons as 'Conservancy Workers' arose from a miscommunication between the Municipality and Respondent. The Municipality had failed to submit details regarding the "man in position" status of all Group-D employees as on the date of the proposed re-designation. In the absence of this information, it was not feasible for respondent to ascertain the availability of vacant sanctioned posts for the purpose of re-designation as 'Conservancy Workers'.

It was held by the court that pension and other retiral benefits, once earned by an employee after rendering long and continuous service, ought not to be delayed, even by a single day. Delay in such cases causes undue hardship to the retired employees, who depend on these dues for their sustenance. It was held by the court that the integration of updated digital infrastructure, intended to bring about administrative efficiency and transparency, has instead resulted in transitional inefficiencies, thereby temporarily impeding the finalisation of pension benefits for fourth-grade staffs.

It was further held by the court that employees who have devoted decades of their lives in service to the State should not be subjected to undue hardship and delay in receiving their rightful dues. Technology is a tool for advancement and should serve as a means to ease the burden of governance upon the citizenry. It was further held that a system designed for public welfare cannot operate in a manner so contrary to its intended objective. The authorities concerned cannot take refuge behind the excuse of a digital transition to justify administrative inaction or lapse

It was directed by the court to the Municipality to furnish all the requisite information and documents, as sought by Respondent within a period of one week. Further upon receipt of the information, Respondent shall process the same and take appropriate steps for re-designating all the similarly situated employees, including the Petitioners, as 'Conservancy Workers'. Further the Municipality was directed to take immediate steps for the release of pension and other retiral dues to the Petitioners and all other similarly situated employees.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition was disposed of.

Case Name : Dilip Hari vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors

Case No. : WPA 2944 of 2025

Counsel for the Petitioner : Kajal Ray, Adv.; Suman Nandi, Adv.

Counsel for the Respondents : Tapas Kumar Ghosh, Adv.; Tanmoy Chowdhury; Sk. Md. Galib; Sujata Mukherjee, Adv.