<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court has said that pension is a right and not a bounty, for which an employee is entitled on his superannuation but it can be claimed only when permissible under the relevant rules or a scheme. </p><p>"If an employee is covered under the Provident Fund Scheme and is not holding a pensionable post, he cannot claim pension, nor the court can issue mandamus writ directing the employer to provide pension to an employee who is not covered under the rules," a bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Prashant Kumar Mishra said.</p><p>Acting on with a batch of petitions filed by UP Roadways Retired Officials and Officers Association, the bench agreed with the Allahabad High Court's observation that the appellants having received retiral benefits including the benefit under the Employees Provident Fund Scheme, cannot be permitted to turn round and contend that they should also be given pension. </p>.BJP spokesperson Shazia Ilmi throws mic mid-debate; later calls journalist 'pervert'.<p>In another batch of petitions, the bench said the state government employees absorbed in the UP State Roadways Corporation would be entitled to pension. The “phrase that their service conditions shall not be inferior to the conditions as were available under the Government” would be applicable to the state government employees for the purposes of according benefit of pension, it said, after going through the Government Orders.</p><p>However, the employees of Roadways who were not holding any pensionable post prior to their deputation or absorption in the Corporation, are not entitled to pension, as their service conditions in the erstwhile Roadways did not provide that they are entitled to pension. Thus, they have not been put to any inferior service conditions on their joining the services in the Corporation, the bench added. </p>
<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court has said that pension is a right and not a bounty, for which an employee is entitled on his superannuation but it can be claimed only when permissible under the relevant rules or a scheme. </p><p>"If an employee is covered under the Provident Fund Scheme and is not holding a pensionable post, he cannot claim pension, nor the court can issue mandamus writ directing the employer to provide pension to an employee who is not covered under the rules," a bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Prashant Kumar Mishra said.</p><p>Acting on with a batch of petitions filed by UP Roadways Retired Officials and Officers Association, the bench agreed with the Allahabad High Court's observation that the appellants having received retiral benefits including the benefit under the Employees Provident Fund Scheme, cannot be permitted to turn round and contend that they should also be given pension. </p>.BJP spokesperson Shazia Ilmi throws mic mid-debate; later calls journalist 'pervert'.<p>In another batch of petitions, the bench said the state government employees absorbed in the UP State Roadways Corporation would be entitled to pension. The “phrase that their service conditions shall not be inferior to the conditions as were available under the Government” would be applicable to the state government employees for the purposes of according benefit of pension, it said, after going through the Government Orders.</p><p>However, the employees of Roadways who were not holding any pensionable post prior to their deputation or absorption in the Corporation, are not entitled to pension, as their service conditions in the erstwhile Roadways did not provide that they are entitled to pension. Thus, they have not been put to any inferior service conditions on their joining the services in the Corporation, the bench added. </p>