Peon’s 11-year wait for pension: Supreme Court directs UP government to fix system

A peon’s 11-year wait for pension has shaken up Uttar Pradesh’s bureaucracy and judiciary, with the Supreme Court directing the state’s chief secretary to put in place a mechanism to ensure that pension papers are not delayed “even by a day”.It was only after Jagdish Prasad Tripathi, who retired as a peon in 2016 after 32 years of service approached the Supreme Court that the extent of the delay came to light. (ANI)A bench of justices KV Viswanathan and Arun Palli, which also asked the Allahabad High Court to consider fast-tracking all pension cases, issued the directions after being confronted with the case of Jagdish Prasad Tripathi, who retired as a peon in 2016 after 32 years of unblemished service but was left without his legitimate retiral dues for nearly 11 years.What happened to Tripathi, the bench said, was an “unfortunate calamity” that should not befall any other employee. It directed the chief secretary to submit by December 31 a report explaining why his pension papers were not cleared immediately after retirement, identifying the officials responsible for the delay, detailing proposed action against them, and explaining how the state proposed to compensate him for the “serious violation” of his rights and “grave injustice”. The court also directed the chief secretary to issue necessary orders or standard operating procedures, if not already in place, to ensure that pension papers of employees legitimately entitled to their dues are not delayed.Also Read | CJI Surya Kant says Supreme Court to soon decide on plea to recall CEC law order: ‘Will examine and take a call’“We are not just taken aback but we are totally aghast that this can happen to an employee who was given dedicated service 32 years,” said the bench in its order released on Tuesday.Tripathi was appointed as a peon at Jan Sevak Uchchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya in Sultanpur in 1984 and retired on July 31, 2016. Despite repeatedly seeking release of his pension, he was forced to approach the Allahabad high court in August 2018.But the case remained pending for years. An order in April 2024 directed the high court registry to trace a counter-affidavit filed by the state and place it on record. The matter was not listed thereafter. Even an application filed by Tripathi in October 2025 seeking early disposal was eventually disposed of in April 2026 without fixing a date for hearing.It was only after Tripathi approached the Supreme Court that the extent of the delay came to light.Reading through the records, the bench said it was “shocked” to find that for nearly a decade after his superannuation, “for no fault of the petitioner”, he had not been paid his retiral dues. The court said it ordinarily would not interfere with an order merely fixing a date, but did so because the matter concerned Tripathi’s “livelihood” and “dignity”.Also Read | Supreme Court closes 22-year-old case for constitutional limits on privilege, but leaves key questions openThe state’s own compliance affidavit revealed a striking contradiction. It initially claimed that Tripathi had remained absent from July 2009 to November 2010, resulting in only provisional pension being approved. But the very next paragraph acknowledged that he had actually been paid salary for that period, indicating there had been no interruption in his service.The department subsequently cancelled the provisional pension order and recommended final pension after verifying his service record. By then, however, years had been lost. Gratuity of ₹4.49 lakh was paid only in 2025, while ₹7.16 lakh towards GPF was disbursed in February 2025.After the Supreme Court’s intervention, Tripathi received ₹29.06 lakh towards pension arrears and other benefits on September 14. He will now receive a regular monthly pension plus dearness allowance.The bench was particularly anguished by the fact that Tripathi, now 71 and suffering from several medical complications, had repeatedly sought his pension but received no meaningful response from the department.“We really wonder how the petitioner has survived for the last eleven years,” said the court, stressing that pension is neither a bounty nor charity but deferred payment for services already rendered -- effectively, a portion of an employee’s salary kept back during service and paid after retirement.Also Read | Supreme Court strength rises to 37 after HC chief justices elevated; women judges increased to 3The court also turned its attention to the judiciary’s role in the prolonged ordeal. It directed that a copy of its order be placed before the chief justice of the Allahabad high court, and asked him to examine whether cases concerning non-release of pension could be given “prioritised hearing and early disposal”.The matter has been posted for January 4, 2027, when the Supreme Court will consider the state’s response to the directions.