Synopsis

The respondents were professors at AIIMS appointed on ad hoc basis between 1997‑1999. They continued on ad hoc basis without break until they were regularly selected through a competitive examination in 2005 and appointed as professors in the same disciplines. They claimed that their ad hoc service should be counted towards pensionary benefits under the Old Pension Scheme (OPS). An identical issue involving PGIMER, Chandigarh was decided in favour of doctors in Dr. Neelam Aggarwal by the Chandigarh Bench of CAT, affirmed by the Punjab & Haryana High Court; the Supreme Court dismissed the SLP leaving the question of law open. The Delhi High Court held that (i) the facts were identical; (ii) the judgment of the High Court (P&H) remains binding despite the Supreme Court “keeping the question open” – such an order does not dilute the precedential value; (iii) the respondents were entitled to count their ad hoc service for pension. The writ petition was dismissed in limine.

Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice C. Hari Shankar and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Om Prakash Shukla (Division Bench)

Date of Judgment: 29th April 2026

Citation: W.P.(C) 5198/2026 (2026:DHC:3682-DB)

Core Law: Service Law – Counting of ad hoc service for pension; Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972; Precedential value of High Court judgment when SLP dismissed with “question of law kept open”.

1. Heading of the judgment

High court of delhi at new delhi

W.p.(c) 5198 of 2026 and cm appl. 25464-465 of 2026

All india institute of medical sciences (aiims) (petitioner) vs. Dr. rakesh lodha & ors (respondents)

Coram: hon’ble mr. justice c. hari shankar and hon’ble mr. justice om prakash shukla (division bench)

Date: 29th april, 2026

2. Legal framework

Major laws and provisions involved:

• Central civil services (pension) rules, 197

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.