Source: Jharkhand High Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Jharkhand High Court in the matter of Birsa Agricultural University v. State of Jharkhand has held that a pension is earned by the employee on account of their meritorious past services is a constitutional right under Article 300A of the Constitution of India, 1950 (COI).

What was the Background of Article 300A of the COI?

• In this case the respondents (Mahmud Allam, Md. Abbas Ali, Deo Narayan Saw and Shekh Ketabul Hussain) were engaged under the appellant (Birsa Agricultural University) as daily wagers.
• The respondents approached the writ court with a grievance of non-regularization of their service because other similarly situated daily wagers under the University were regularized.
• The writ petition was disposed of with the direction to the appellant to consider the regularization of the respondents.
• Later respondents were offered appointments, which according to the appellant university were fresh appointments and therefore respondents were not entitled to claim any benefit of their past services.
• Aggrieved by the same, the respondents filed writ applications to claim all benefits of pay, allowances and pension for their past services which were later disposed off.
• Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed an appeal before the Jharkhand High Court which was later dismissed by the Court.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• A bench comprising of Justices Shree Chandrashekhar and Navneet Kumar observed that denying pensionary benefits to an employee is to rob them of a constitutional right under Article 300A of the COI, as pension is earned by the employee on account of their meritorious past services.
• The High Court relied on the case of Deokinandan Prasad v. State of Bihar (1971) wherein the Supreme Court held that pension is not a bounty or a charity, it is earned by the employee on account of meritorious past services.

What is Article 300A of the COI?

• This Article states that persons not to be deprived of property save by authority of law.
• Originally, Part III of the COI established the right to property as one of the fundamental rights.
• However, the Right to Property ceased to be a fundamental right with the 44^th Constitution Amendment in 1978.
• It was made a Constitutional right under Article 300A of the COI.
• Article 300A requires the State to follow due procedure and authority of law to deprive a person of his or her private property.