Managing Director And Others vs Brijlal Raikwar Through Lrs And Others

Sanjay Yadav, J

This appeal under Section 2(1) of Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nayalaya (Khand Nyayapeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 is directed against an order dated 03.04.2019 passed in Writ Petition No.10524/2015.

The issue as to whether the erstwhile employees of Society whose services have been absorbed with MPSEB will be entitled for pension in view of the decision rendered in the case of Panchraj Tiwari vs M.P. State Electricity Board (2014) 5 SCC 101 or as to whether they are governed by the terms of absorption which provides for payment of pension/gratuity as per the Rules and Regulations of the Society, has been answered by a Full Bench of our High Court in Writ Appeal No.897/2019 (Managing Director, M.P. Poorva Kshetra V.V. Co. Ltd. vs Sita Ram Patel) and connected appeals; wherein it has been held :

"30. In the light of the aforesaid facts and enunciation of law it is stated, at the cost of repetition, that the terms and conditions of an absorbed employee is governed by the terms and conditions of absorption under a statute/rules/regulations/circular. As per clause (5) of the terms and conditions of absorption, the pension/gratuity was payable to the employees absorbed in the Board as per rules/regulations of the society concerned and not of the Board. Further, the said condition stands approved and affirmed as per paras 4 and 17 of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in Panchraj Tiwari (supra) as well as the observations made in the case of Brijendra Singh Kushwaha (supra) and Uma Shankar Dwivedi (supra). In none of the cases it was decided that erstwhile employees of the society shall be entitled for pension as per rules/regulations of the Board. Thus the Division Bench of this Court in Bijali Karmchari Sangh case has not laid down the correct law and the respondents who are the employees of the erstwhile RECS shall be governed by the terms and conditions of the absorption which provide for payment of pension/gratuity as per rules and regulations of the society concerned and not of the Board and, therefore, they shall not be entitled to the benefit of pension at par with the employees of the Board.

In view of the aforesaid, we answer the reference No.(i) holding that the decision in the case of M.P. State Electricity Board (now known as M.P. Paschim Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co. Ltd.) Indore vs. Bijali Karmachari Sangh (W.A. No.334/2015) wherein it has been held that employees of the societies are entitled to pension, does not lay down the correct law. We also answer the reference No.(ii) that the respondents who are employees of the erstwhile RECS shall be governed by the terms and conditions of absorption which provides for payment of pension/gratuity as per rules and regulations of the society concerned, and therefore, they shall not be entitled to pension at par with the employees of the Board."

Though it is contended on behalf of respondent No.1 that the decision in Writ Appeal No.897/2019 (Managing Director, M.P. Poorva Kshetra V.V. Co. Ltd. vs Sita Ram Patel) is subjected to challenge before Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) Diary No.41425/2019 (Sita Ram Patel vs Managing Director, M.P. Poorva Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Company Ltd. & Ors.), wherein notices have been issued; however, as submitted by learned counsel for the appellants, since there is no stay of operation of the order passed by Full Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.897/2019 (supra) and as presently advised, the present appeal is disposed of in the terms of the order passed by Full Bench in Writ Appeal No.897/2019 (supra).

All pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.