The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court has stayed a single-judge order that directed the Uttar Pradesh government to extend Old Pension Scheme (OPS) benefits to certain employees regularized after 2005. The court observed that the matter raises “significant legal questions” and noted that the validity of the Uttar Pradesh Pension Amendment Act, 2021, is currently pending before the Supreme Court.
The controversy stems from a November 4, 2025, judgment delivered by a single-judge bench. That ruling directed the state to grant OPS benefits to employees by clubbing their entire service periods, even if their services were regularized after April 1, 2005—the cutoff date for the implementation of the New Pension Scheme (NPS).
The state’s Public Works Department (PWD) filed approximately 40 special appeals challenging this directive, arguing that it imposed an undue and substantial financial burden on the state exchequer and bypassed established legal precedents.
The Uttar Pradesh government, represented in the appeals, contended that the single-judge’s verdict was “contrary to earlier division-bench judgments.” Specifically, the state counsel cited the Ashok Tiwari case, arguing that the single judge lacked the authority to override precedents set by larger benches.
Furthermore, the state submitted that some of the rulings relied upon by the single judge in the impugned judgment had already been “set aside by larger benches,” rendering the foundation of the previous order legally untenable.
A division bench comprising Justice Rajan Roy and Justice A. K. Chaudhary examined the special appeals. During the proceedings, the bench took note of the broader legal landscape, specifically mentioning that the “validity of the Uttar Pradesh Pension Amendment Act, 2021, is currently under consideration before the Supreme Court.”
The court found merit in the state’s contention that the transition from OPS to NPS is governed by specific statutory dates and that the single judge’s interpretation required a deeper judicial review. The bench observed that the appeals raised “significant legal questions requiring a detailed examination” before any final implementation of the single-judge’s directions could take place.
The division bench stayed the operation of the November 4, 2025, order. By granting this interim relief to the state government, the court has effectively paused the extension of OPS benefits to the affected employees pending a final decision.
The court has scheduled the matter for a final hearing on April 27.
