SUMAN K SHRIVASTAVA
Ranchi, April 13: In a significant ruling, the Jharkhand High Court has directed the state government to implement a National Lok Adalat award granting pensionary benefits to retired employees, while also clarifying important legal issues on the enforceability of such awards and the scope of writ jurisdiction.
Pension dispute and Lok Adalat award
The case involves a group of retired employees from departments such as the Water Resources Department and Minor Irrigation Department across districts, including Garhwa, Palamu, Sahebganj, and Khunti.
They had initially approached the High Court seeking pension and related benefits by counting their services from the date of their initial engagement as daily-rated workers, instead of from the date of regularisation.
Their earlier writ petition was referred to the National Lok Adalat, where the dispute was settled on July 13, 2024. The state authorities agreed to extend pensionary benefits by counting past service, and the concerned Executive Engineer was present during the proceedings and had undertaken to comply.
Despite the settlement attaining finality, the award was not implemented. The petitioners first moved a contempt plea, which was dismissed, and later filed a fresh writ petition seeking enforcement. This too was dismissed by a single judge on the grounds of res judicata and maintainability.
ALSO READ: Ranchi DC caps private school fee hike at 10%, crackdown on illegal charges
Legal issue: Maintainability and enforcement of Lok Adalat award
The core legal question before the division bench was whether a writ petition is maintainable to enforce a Lok Adalat award, or whether the petitioners must seek execution before a civil court.
The state argued that:
- The second writ petition was barred by res judicata
- The High Court, under Article 226, cannot act as an executing court
- The proper remedy was to file an execution case
However, the petitioners contended that:
- The earlier writ was disposed of on settlement, not on merits, hence res judicata does not apply
- Non-implementation of a Lok Adalat award gives rise to a fresh and continuing cause of action
- The state is bound to honour a statutory settlement under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987
High Court ruling: Enforcement allowed
The division bench, comprising Chief Justice M S Sonak and Justice Rajesh Shankar rejected the technical objections raised by the state and held that:
- A Lok Adalat award is final, binding, and equivalent to a civil court decree under Section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act
- The state cannot avoid compliance by raising procedural objections
- In the facts of the case, relegating the petitioners to a civil execution proceeding would be unjust
The court also noted that the state had neither challenged the Lok Adalat award nor complied with it, despite a clear undertaking.
Relief granted and observations
Allowing the appeal, the High Court directed the state authorities to:
- Implement the Lok Adalat award within four weeks
- Pay 6% annual interest on the dues from the date of the award till payment
The court came down heavily on the state, observing that its conduct was “indifferent and whimsical” and had caused serious hardship to elderly, retired employees who had been waiting for their rightful dues for over one year and nine months.
It further emphasised that:
- The state is expected to act fairly and reasonably
- Lok Adalat mechanisms would lose credibility if awards are not honoured
- Technical objections cannot override substantive justice, especially in welfare-related claims like pension
Key legal takeaway
The judgment reinforces that while Lok Adalat awards are executable as civil decrees, High Courts can exercise writ jurisdiction in exceptional cases to ensure their enforcement—particularly where state inaction results in injustice and prolonged deprivation of legal rights.