On forcing the State Revenue Department to make pension payments based on length of service
No. 6001-24-00-6ap/3407 dated June 18, 2025
Plaintiff: K.K.
Respondents: Russian State Institution "Department of State Revenue of the State Revenue Committee of the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan" (hereinafter referred to as the Department).
The subject of the dispute is about the coercion to make pension payments based on length of service.
Review of the plaintiff's cassation complaint PLOT:
K.K. served in the internal affairs bodies from May 29, 1986 to
December 20, 1998. The term of service in law enforcement agencies was 14 years, 2 months, and 1 day.
From November 3, 1999 to March 4, 2013, he held various positions in the Customs Control Department (hereinafter referred to as the DTC). As of March 4, 2013, the plaintiff's service life in the customs authorities was 13 years, 4 months, and 1 day.
By the order of the DTC dated March 4, 2013, K.K. was relieved of the post of deputy head of customs post "B" and appointed to the post of chief specialist of customs post "C". Subsequently, by DTC Order No. 101 l/s dated June 27, 2014, the plaintiff was appointed to the position of chief specialist of the customs post "M".
By Government Resolution No. 1000 dated September 22, 2014, the territorial bodies of the Customs Control Committee of the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Tax Committee of the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan were reorganized by merging into the territorial bodies of the State Revenue Committee of the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
Pursuant to this Resolution, K.K. was appointed to the positions of Chief specialist of Customs posts "M" and "B" by orders of the Department dated November 12, 2014 and June 1, 2015.
On August 23, 2023, the plaintiff was dismissed from the state revenue authorities at his own request.
K.K.'s application dated April 10, 2024 to the Department for the appointment of pension payments for service on April 25, 2024 was left without satisfaction.
Disagreeing with the refusal, K.K. appealed to the court with the above claim. The claim is motivated by the fact that it relates to the persons specified in subparagraph 3) of paragraph 2 of Article 212 of the Social Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the Social Code) who are entitled to pension payments for years of service.
Judicial acts:
1st instance: the claim was denied.
Appeal: the decision of the court of first instance remains unchanged.
Cassation: judicial acts in this case are upheld.
Conclusions: in rejecting the claim, the courts reasonably proceeded from the following.
According to subparagraph 3) of paragraph 2 of Article 212 of the Social Code, military personnel (except for conscripts serving in the reserve), employees of special state and law enforcement agencies, and the state courier service who have a total work experience of twenty-five years or more, of which at least twelve years and more are eligible for retirement benefits. six months of continuous military service, service in special state and law enforcement agencies, and the state courier service., and dismissed due to staff reductions or during the liquidation of a law enforcement agency, or due to non-compliance with their position or work performed due to a state of health that prevents them from continuing to work, or who have reached the age appropriate for the age limit in law enforcement service for a fixed special rank, class rank, at the time of the abolition of the right to have special ranks and class ranks, as well as to wear uniforms.
When the customs authorities were abolished, the plaintiff did not transfer to the economic investigation service. He continued to work in the state revenue authorities, which did not provide for the right to have special ranks and class ranks, as well as to wear uniforms. He was dismissed on August 23, 2023 from the state revenue authorities at his own request.
Other arguments of the courts are detailed in the contested judicial acts.
All the arguments of the author of the cassation appeal are identical in their content, meaning and purpose to the arguments given in the courts of the first and appellate instances. These arguments were reviewed by the court of appeal and given a proper legal assessment. No new arguments are given in the cassation appeal.
Since the circumstances of the case have been established correctly, and the rules of law have been applied correctly by the court of appeal, the collegium finds no grounds for canceling or changing judicial acts.
Attention!
Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.
For more information, please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085.
Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases
