The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has upheld the right of a retired municipal employee to receive his long-pending retiral benefits, while slightly modifying an earlier order on interest. The court made it clear that pension and retirement dues are not a favour from the government but a legal right earned through years of service.
The judgment was delivered by a Division Bench led by the Chief Justice on January 29, 2026.
Read also:- Jharkhand High Court Refuses Bail to Naveen Kedia, Says Custody Is a Must Before Seeking Regular Bail
Background of the Case
The case arose from an appeal filed by the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and its municipal authorities against a 2025 decision of the writ court. The original petition was filed by Gulzar Ahmad Khan, a resident of Baramulla, who retired after serving the Municipal Council for nearly 25 years.
Khan had approached the court complaining that his service book was never properly updated and that he was denied due increments and retirement benefits despite retiring honourably. He sought directions for reconstruction of his service record and release of all dues.
In August 2025, the writ court allowed his petition and directed the authorities to reconstruct the service book and release all retiral benefits within two months. The court had also imposed interest at 7 percent per annum in case of delay.
Government’s Objection
Challenging that order, the UT government argued that Khan’s initial appointment in 1999 and his regularisation in 2007 were illegal. It was submitted that investigations into irregular appointments were pending with the Crime Branch, and therefore, the employee was not entitled to any benefits.
The government’s counsel also contended that the interest rate awarded by the writ court was on the higher side.
What the Court Noted
The Division Bench did not accept the government’s stand. The court noted that Khan was allowed to continue in service for over two decades and was never subjected to any departmental or judicial proceedings.
“The record shows that no charge-sheet was ever filed and the respondent was permitted to retire on superannuation,” the bench observed.
The judges pointed out that if the appointment was indeed illegal, the authorities should have acted in time. “Having allowed the respondent to serve for nearly 25 years, it is now too late for the appellants to raise the plea of illegality,” the court said.
The bench further underlined that retirement benefits are earned through long service. “The benefits claimed are not a charity but a right flowing from service rendered over decades,” the court remarked.
Read also:- CLAT 2026 Answer Key Controversy Lands in Allahabad HC, Merit List to Be Revised
On Pension as a Legal Right
Relying on Supreme Court rulings, the court reiterated that pension and gratuity are treated as property under the Constitution.
Quoting earlier judgments, the bench observed, “Pension is not a matter of discretion of the employer but a valuable right, which cannot be denied except by authority of law.”
The court also noted that despite claims of an ongoing investigation since 2011, no final outcome or charge-sheet had been produced even after 14 years.
Read also:- No Application Needed for Citizenship by Birth, Says Delhi High Court While Ordering Passport Issue
Final Decision
While upholding the substance of the writ court’s directions, the High Court modified the order on interest. Instead of 7 percent, the court reduced the rate to 6 percent per annum.
The bench ruled that if the authorities fail to comply with the writ court’s directions within three months, Khan will be entitled to interest at 6 percent on all retiral benefits and arrears, calculated from the date they became due until actual payment.
With this modification, the appeal and connected applications were disposed of.
Case Title: Union Territory of J&K vs Gulzar Ahmad Khan
Case No.: LPA No. 306/2025
Decision Date: 29 January 2026
