Jugal Kishore vs Punjab State etc

G.R. Majithia, J.—The petitioners have sought a mandate from this Court to the respondents to grant them pensionary benefits and also a writ of Certiorari to quash the order dated May 31, 1989 vide which their representation for grant of pensionary benefits was rejected by respondent No. 3.

The facts :-

The petitioners were the employees of the Punjab Roadways. They were transferred to the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar on January 1, 1980, On November 29, 1983 a policy decision was taken by respondent No 1 to grant pension to the employees of Punjab Roadways who were not confirmed against permanent pensionable posts on November 1,1955. While announcing the grant of pension to the employees of the Punjab Roadways, respondent No. 1 had put a condition that the benefit will be granted to those employees who had retired on and after that date The petitioners moved this Court for a direction to respondent No 1 to grant them the pensionary benefits This Court did not express any opinion on merits and directed the petitioners to file a representation to respondent No. 2 for the said relief. The petitioners filed the representation which was rejected vide order dated May 31, 1989.

Written statements had been filed on behalf of the respondents. Respondent Nos. 1 and 3 justified the impugned order on the ground that the petitioners ha 1 not exercised their option as enjoined by Rule 14.30 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume II on their transfer to non pensionable posts in the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar.

The decision of the respondent refusing to grant pensionary benefits to the petitioners is arbitrary and undjustified. Respondent No. 1 took a policy decision on November 29, 1983 conceding pensionary benefits to the employees of the Punjab Roadways who were not confirmed against permanent pensionable posts on November 1, 1955 but became entitled to benefits under Punjab Contributory Piovi-dent Fund scheme as contained in Chapter XIV of the Punjab Civil Services Rules Volume II. It was provided in the schme that all those employees retiring on or after November 30, 1983 will be entitled to pensionary benefits admissible under the Punjab Civil Services Rules Volume II. My esteemed brother M R. Agnihotri, J while deciding Civil Writ Petition No. 473 of 1987 in which almost identical question arose for determination held that there was no rational basis for taking November 30, 1983 as the material date for grant of pension and the prescription of such an artificial date is on the face of it, arbitrary and discriminatory. It was struck down being violative of the rule of law laid down by the apex Court in D. S Nakara and Ors. v. Union of India,1, The resultant effect will be that all those employees who retired from the service of Punjab Roadways irrespective of their date of retirement will be entitled to the pensionary benefits. The provisions of Rule 14 30 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules Volume II read as under : -

"14.30. (1) If a subscriber is permanently transferred to pensionable service he shall, at his option, be entitled -

(a) to continue subscribe to the Fund, in which case he shall not be entitled to any pension; or

(b) to earn pension in respect of such pensionable service, in which case, with effect from the date of his permanent transfer-

(i) he shall case to subscribe to the Fund;

(ii) the amount of contributions by the Government with interest thereon, standing to his credit in the Fund shall be repaid to Government.

(iii) the amount of subscription together with interest thereon standing to his credit in the Fund shall be transferred to his credit in the General Provident Fund, to which thereafter he shall or may subscribe in accordance with the rules of that Fund; and

(iv) he shall be entitled to count towards pension such part of the period during which he subscribed to the Fund as Government may determine."

(2) A subscriber shall communicate his option under clause (I) by letter to the Accounts Officer within three months of the date of the order transferring him permanently to pensionable serviee; and if the communication is not received in the office of the Accounts Officer within that period, the subscriber shall be deemed to have exercised his option in the manner referred to in sub-clause (a) of that clause "

Under clause (2) of the Rule, a subscriber contributing to the Fund on transfer to a pensionable service has to opt within three months of the date of the order of transfer for pension. If he does not exercise option, he will only be entitled to the benefit of clause (1) of Rule 14 30 of Punjab Civil Services Rules Volume II This rule is in applicable to the instant case. On the date when the services of the petitioners were transferred to the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar, the scheme under which the pension had been allowed had not corns into operation. The scheme became applicable only with effect from November 30, 1983 and: the pensionary benefits were only available to those employees who had retired on or after November 30, 1983. This date has already been struck down by me in the earlier part of the judgment Consequently, the question to exercise the option as envisaged by sub-rule 14.30 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules Volume It was inapplicable In an identical matter in C W P. Mo. 473 of 1987 this Court has already granted pensionary benefits to the employees similarly situated. There are no distinguishable features in this case. Relying upon the ratio of judgment in C.W.P. No 473 of 1987 supra, I direct the respondents to release the pensionary benefits to the petitioners under the rules within three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment. The impugned brder dated May 31, 1989 is accordingly quashed.