Pension: Fixation of cut-off date for implementing pension scheme – Whether discriminatory – Employees of the appellant Corporation were governed by the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme – Appellant Corporation introduced Pension scheme in the year 1995 – Cut-off date for implementation of pension date was fixed as 5.6.1995 that is from the date on which Scheme was approved by the Cabinet/Government – Plea of respondent-Union that the fixation of cut-off date was arbitrary and discriminatory – Held: Employees of the appellant-corporation who were governed by the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme and retired prior to 5.6.1995 and the employees of the appellant Corporation, who were in service and continued after 5.6.1995, cannot be treated as a homogeneous class – Retired employees, who were governed by the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme, on their retirement had already received the benefits of such Scheme, and constituted different class than those employees who were in service as on 5.6.1995 – It is always open for the employer to introduce new Schemes and benefits, having regard to financial health of the employer – Whenever such new benefit is extended for the existing employees, retired employees cannot seek such benefit, merely on the ground that they too were the former employees of the Corporation – When the members of the respondent-Union retired, there was no Pension Scheme at all – They were merely governed by the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme and, on retirement, they were already granted the benefit of such Scheme – In that view of the matter, retired employees cannot question the cut-off date fixed for grant of Pension Scheme.
TRANSPORT CORPN. RETD. EMPLOYEES UNION
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. All the members of the respondent-Union, while in service, were governed by Contributory Provident Fund Scheme. All those employees who retired before 05.06.1995, were paid all retiral benefits, applicable to them. As the Pension Scheme was not in existence during the relevant time, it was not the case of violation of any service conditions either. The Pension Scheme is introduced by way of notification dated 06.10.1995, by giving effect from 05.06.1995, on which date the Cabinet has approved the Scheme. The employees who were governed by the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme and retired prior to 05.06.1995 and the employees who were in service and continued after 05.06.1995, of the appellant Corporation, cannot be treated as a homogeneous class. The retired employees, who were governed by the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme, on their retirement had already received the benefits of such Scheme, constitute different class than those employees who were in service as on 05.06.1995. [Para 19][113-D-G]
State of Rajasthan and Another v. Amrit Lal Gandhi and others (1997) 2 SCC 342 : [1997] 1 SCR 121 – relied on.
Union of India and another v. Deoki Nandan Aggarwal 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 323 : [1991] 3 SCR 873; Subrata Sen and others v. Union of India and others (2001) 8 SCC 71 : [2001] (3) Suppl. SCR 140 – held
inapplicable.
D.S. Nakara & Ors. v. Union of India (1983) 1 SCC
305 : [1983] 2 SCR 165; State of Punjab v. Amar Nath Goyal (2005) 6 SCC 754 : [2005] 2 Suppl. SCR 549; Govt. of Andhra Pradesh & others v. N. Subbarayudu & others (2008)14 SCC 702 : [2008] 5 SCR 522; Suchet Singh Yadav and others v. Union of India and others (2019) 11 SCC 520; All Manipur Pensioners Association by its Secretary v. The State of Manipur and others (2019) 9 SCALE 282 : [2019] 9 SCR 905; R.L Marwaha v. Union of India and others 1987(4) SCC 31: [1987]
3 SCR 928 –referred to.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.