In a significant intervention for senior citizen rights, the Supreme Court of India has directed the Allahabad High Court to grant an “out-of-turn” and urgent hearing to a 77-year-old cancer patient seeking his pension and post-retiral benefits. The petitioner’s plea has remained pending before the High Court for the last nine years, a delay the Supreme Court viewed with concern.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi on Thursday emphasized that the case should be considered on a “sympathetic basis.” The top court was responding to a petition filed by Ram Shanker, a former Uttar Pradesh government employee, who argued that the prolonged judicial delay violated his fundamental rights to equality and life under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
The legal battle traces back to Ram Shanker’s service history. He was employed with the Uttar Pradesh government from June 1, 1970, to May 28, 1985, after which he joined the Gas Authority of India Ltd (GAIL). Despite his years of service, the state government denied him pensionary benefits, citing specific rules and provisions.
Shanker originally approached the Allahabad High Court in 2017 to challenge the state’s decision. However, his seeking of justice hit a wall of procedural delays. According to the petition, the case was adjourned on numerous occasions over nearly a decade, often because the state government requested more time to respond.
In his appeal to the Supreme Court, Shanker contended that a pension is not a “bounty” or a discretionary gift from the government. Instead, he argued it is a vested right earned through years of service and forms an essential component of the “right to livelihood” under Article 21.
The petitioner’s health condition added a layer of urgency to the proceedings. Suffering from cancer at the age of 77, Shanker’s legal team argued that the judicial system’s failure to resolve the claim in a timely manner was particularly egregious given his medical and financial needs.
By directing the High Court to prioritize this specific case, the Supreme Court has underscored the necessity of sensitive judicial handling when dealing with elderly litigants and those with life-threatening illnesses.
