UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. vs DR. KHURSHEED KHATOON

Judgment text excerpt

$~100 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4645/2026, CM APPL. 22648/2026 & CM APPL. 22649/2026 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Himanshu Pathak and Mr. Chetanya Puri, SPC with Mr. Mohit Gupta and Ms. Garima Mehta, Advs. versus DR. KHURSHEED KHATOON .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Mr. Yogesh Kumar Mahur, Mr. Harkesh Parashar and Ms. Yogita, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 08.04.2026 C. HARI SHANKAR, J. 1. The respondent was appointed as Assistant Research Officer in the Central Council for Research in Unani Medicine1 in 1986 on ad hoc basis against a substantive vacancy. She was re-appointed in 1996. There was a break in service between 1986 and 1996. However, after 1996, she continued on ad hoc basis till her services were regularised in February 2004. 2. It is not in dispute that, if the respondent were to be entitled to 1 “CCRUM” hereinafter Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AJIT W.P.(C) 4645/2026 Page 1 of 7 KUMAR Signing Date:09.04.2026 19:34:05 count her ad hoc service for the purposes of pension, she would be entitled to the benefit of the Old Pension Scheme2 as the New Pension Scheme3 was introduced w.e.f. 1 January 2004. 3. The respondent represented to the CCRUM for counting of her ad hoc service for reckoning her pensionary benefits and, accordingly, for extending her the benefit of the OPS. 4. As the CCRUM did not accede to the respondent’s request, she moved the Central Administrative Tribunal4 by way of OA 91/2025. 5. By judgment dated 14 July 2025, the Tribunal has allowed the OA in the following terms: “6. To summarize the applicant was appointed on ad-hoc basis in the year 1996 and, thereafter, regularized in February, 2004.