Supreme Court rules pre-regularization service counts for pension benefits

The case concerns whether the pre-regularization service of employees of the Punjab School Education Board (PSEB), who were initially engaged on a contract or ad-hoc basis, should be counted as qualifying service for pension benefits, thereby entitling them to the old pension scheme rather than the new Defined Contributory Pension Scheme.

Who it concerns: Appellants: Punjab School Education Board and another; Respondents: Satnam Singh and others; Bench: Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra.

What the court decided

• The Court rejected the appellant's plea of res judicata, distinguishing the current dispute over pensionary consequences from previous litigation regarding regularization.
• The Court held that the substance of the engagement (regularization) prevails over the form (appointment letters), finding that the Board's actions and public notices demonstrated an intent to regularize the employees.
• The Court concurred with the High Court's view that the employees were entitled to benefits flowing from regularization, including the counting of pre-regularization service for pension purposes.

Also in the document

• The judgment is marked as 'REPORTABLE' in the 2026 INSC 965 citation.
• The Court noted that the public notice dated 18.07.2004 was not open to the general public but specifically conveyed the decision to appoint existing workers on a regular basis.
• The Court observed that the cause of action for the current dispute is distinct from previous rounds of litigation because it concerns service benefits arising from a continuing service relationship.