LexStreakRead free →
Supreme Court of India· 21 February 2025

Where the State has filed its appeals belatedly and the delay was never explained in any satisfactory manner, may the Court still examine the matter on merits, and with what consequence to the State?

STATE OF ODISHA & ORS. v. SUDHANSU SEKHAR JENA
2025 INSC 259 · SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.2146 OF 2024
Coram: Sudhanshu Dhulia; Ahsanuddin Amanullah
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow r.18(6) Odisha Civil Services (P…📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

Where the matter affects not a few employees but a large number, and in turn the State Exchequer, the Court may examine the cases on their merits despite the inordinate delay; but all such belatedly filed cases are set apart for payment of costs, the State paying Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand to the employee concerned.

Headnote

Odisha Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1992 — r.18(3) — r.18(6) — Job contract establishment — Work-charged establishment — Qualifying service — Pensionary benefits — Constitution of India — Art. 14 — Odisha Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1992 — r.18(6) — Job contract service — Only so much as makes eligible — Held: Where a job contract employee is brought over to a regular pensionable establishment, only so much of his job contract service as would render him eligible for pensionary benefits is added to his qualifying service. The entire period cannot be counted. (¶14, 15) Odisha Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1992 — r.18(3) — Work-charged service — Prem Singh reading — Held further: Work-charged service of five years or more without interruption, followed by appointment to a pensionable establishment, qualifies for pension in full. The two Judge Bench reading confining Prem Singh to qualifying service does not appear to be correct, the three Judge Bench being quite unambiguous. (¶12, 13) Constitution of India — Art. 14 — Classification between the two establishments — Left open — Held further: Whether the classification between work-charged establishment and job contract establishment is artificial or an unequal classification violative of Article 14 cannot be determined where the Rules were never challenged and the point was never even mentioned. That aspect is left open. (¶16, 18) Odisha Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1992 — Belated appeals by the State — Costs — Held further: Inexcusable delay does not bar examination on merits where a large number of employees and the State Exchequer are affected, but every belatedly filed case is set apart for costs of Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand to the employee concerned. Appeals allowed. (¶3, 20)

In the Court's own words
Paragraph 3It is not a case concerning a few employees, rather it affects a large number, and in turn, the State Exchequer. It is for this reason that we were persuaded to look into these matter(s), although initially, we were not inclined to interfere, considering the lethargic approach of the State in pursuing these matters, and the inordinate delay caused, which was never explained in any satisfactory manner. The State though kept filing one Special Leave Petition after another before this Court, not in one go but one after another, most of them belatedly, to complete a mere formality. For this reason, many of these petitions have been dismissed on the ground of delay itself as stated earlier, as Courts do not come to rescue those who sleep over their rights. Be it the State. The liability of the State on this issue will be addressed towards the end. Now, since we are taking up these matters, what will be the fate of the already dismissed petitions after our determination, we will address at the end.
Paragraph 20Having made the above determination, we also feel that it is our duty to bring on record the extreme carelessness and lethargic manner in which the State has been pursuing these cases, both in the High Court and before this Court. The delay caused by them is inexcusable. Nevertheless, we have heard these matters for reasons we have already stated in the preceding paragraphs in the earlier part of this judgment. All such cases, which were belatedly filed, both before the High Court in Appeal and then before this Court as Special Leave Petitions, are hereby set apart from the rest, only for the purpose of payment of costs. Consequently, in all such cases the State shall pay an amount of Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand, to the employee concerned. This amount shall be deposited in the account of the employees, or as the case might be, within a period of four weeks from today. This order shall not be made effective till the above amount is deposited in the account of each of such employees.
Acts & Sections
r.18(6) Odisha Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1992r.18(3) Odisha Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1992Art. 14 Constitution of India

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of STATE OF ODISHA & ORS. v. SUDHANSU SEKHAR JENA — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Under the Odisha Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1992, when a job contract employee is brought over to a post created under a regular pensionable establishment, is his entire job contract service counted for pension?Under the Odisha Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1992, how does Rule 18(3) treat work-charged service differently from Rule 18(6)'s treatment of job contract service?Where a three Judge Bench has held that the entire period of work-charged service must be counted for pension, may a later two Judge Bench confine that ruling to counting the service only for qualifying service?Does a Tribunal ruling that rests on a total misinterpretation of a High Court judgment, directing that the entire period of job contract employment be counted for pension, govern later claims?Under Article 14 of the Constitution of India, can a court determine whether the classification between work-charged establishment and job contract establishment is artificial where the Rules were never challenged and no party argued the point?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Supreme Court of India. Corrections