Are you looking for a legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.

R. Subramaniam v. Chief Personnel Officer, Central Railway, Ministry Of Railway

R. Subramaniam v. Chief Personnel Officer, Central Railway, Ministry Of Railway

(Supreme Court Of India)

Writ Petition (Civil) No. 981 Of 1993 | 16-01-1995

R. M. Sahai and N. P. Singh, JJ.

1. By this petition the petitioner who was a Railway employee and who retired in the year 1971 but did not opt for Pension Scheme as introduced by the Railway Board by its letter dated 16th November, 1957, rather opted for the Provident Fund System seeks direction to the opposite party to grant him same benefit as was granted to others by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bombay by its order dated 11th November, 1987. The relevant portion of the order passed by the Tribunal is extracted below :

"The respondents are directed to implement the directions given in clauses (i) to (iv) of this order in respect of all the Railway Employees who were similarly placed like the applicants i.e., those who retired during the period from 1.4.1969 to 14.7.1972 and who had indicated their option in favour of pension scheme either at any time while in service or after their retirement and who now desire to opt for the pension scheme.


2. It is not disputed that the S.L.P. filed by the Union against the Order has been dismissed by this Court and the Review Petition was also dismissed on 6th May, 1991. The Union, in our opinion, cannot successfully resist the claim of the petitioner when the Tribunal has directed that this benefit shall be granted even to those employees who retired on or before the pension scheme was introduced and opt for it even now. Since the petitioner opted for the pension scheme in terms of the order passed by the Tribunal may be in 1990, we are of the opinion that in the facts and circumstances of the case the respondent should extend same benefit to the petitioner as has been extended to others.

3. In the result, this petition succeeds and is allowed. Rule is made absolute. The respondent is directed to accept the option of the petitioner and grant him benefit of Pension Scheme. The petitioner is further directed to deposit the entire amount which he received in lieu of Provident Fund System within three months from the date the Government accepts the option of the petitioner. The option shall be accepted within two months from the date a copy of this order is produced.

4. Parties shall bear their own costs.

5. Rule made absolute.

Advocate List
  • FOR
Bench
  • HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. M. SAHAI
  • HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. P. SINGH
Eq Citations
  • (1996) 10 SCC 72
  • 1995 (3) SCT 176 (SC)
  • AIR 1995 SC 983
  • LQ/SC/1995/72
Head Note

— Pension — Pension Scheme — Benefit of pension scheme — Grant of — Petitioner who was a Railway employee and who retired in the year 1971 but did not opt for Pension Scheme as introduced by the Railway Board by its letter dt. 16-11-1957 rather opted for Provident Fund System — Central Administrative Tribunal directed that this benefit shall be granted even to those employees who retired on or before the pension scheme was introduced and opt for it even now — Held, respondent should extend same benefit to the petitioner as has been extended to others — Government Employees, Retirement Benefits and Pension Act, 1971 — S. 23