IMPORTANT POINT
Option is always time bound. It cannot be kept open indefinitely.
Option kept alive for 8 years and 46000 out of 50000 employees exercised their options for switching over from CPF to Pension. Petitioners cannot be heard to say that they were not aware.
Well settled that CPF and Pension do not go together, but GPF and pension do.
For exercising an option the employees should collect the forms and submit it to concerned officials.

Headnote:(a) Service Law – Conditions if service – Pension and GPF – RSEB introducing Pension and GPF scheme – Extending option time to switch over from CPF Scheme to the Pension and GPF Regulations for eight years and extending the same to all categories of employees – Ground of being unaware of the extended opportunities – Not tenable and acceptable. (Para 30, 47)
       (b) Service Law – Switch over from CPF to Pension and GPF regime – Option – Respondents pleading unawareness – Opportunities extended in eight installments – 46000 out of 50000 employees availing option – Plea of unawareness not tenable. (Para 31, 32)
       (c) Service Law – Pension and GPF – Constitution of India – Article 226 – RSEB introducing Pension and GPF scheme in 1988 – Requiring employees to give option for switch over from CPF – Option period extended eight times and closed on 30th June, 1997 – Thereafter adopting Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 for computation of pension – Employees so long enjoying benefits of CPF finding Pension and GPF scheme more lucrative – Approaching High Court for quashing of closure of option to switch over from CPF to Pension – Ground taken being unawareness of option opportunities – It can be legitimately inferred that the respondents were aware of switch-over option but they chose not to exercise that option either for personal reasons or perhaps because it did not suit them – Position changed after close of the option – Plea not tenable. (Para 43, 50)
       (d) Service Law – Option – Notice published – Option to be exercised in prescribed form – Form not served on each employee individually – Held, employees ought to collect forms and exercised option. (Para 54)
       (2011) 11 SCC 702 – Relied upon
       (2009) 14 SCC 793 – Distinguished
       (e) Employees General Provident Fund Regulations, 1988 – Regulation 2(o) and Regulation 3(l), Employees Pension Regulation, 1988 – Option – To be exercised within statutorily prescribed time – Not only that, employee is duty bound to ensure that the option reaches concerned authorities within time – Employees depriving themselves of pension scheme by not exercising option even within extended time. (Para 61, 62, 63)
       (f) Service Law – Pension, CPF and GPF – Well settled that CPF and Pension do not go together – An employee can however avail of GPF and pension both. (Para 64)
       (g) Service Law – Pension – Not a bounty – An employee earns it – However when there are two schemes one for CPF and the other for Pension and GPF, employee has to make a choice – Unless he switches over, he remains in his original scheme. (Para 69, 70)
       Facts of the case:
       The primary question for consideration in all these appeals is whether the respondents were entitled, as of right, to one more opportunity to switch-over from the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme of which they were members, to the Pension Scheme and the General Provident Fund Scheme implemented by the appellant with effect from 28th November, 1988?
       The Rajasthan State Electricity Board had introduced a Contributory Provident Fund Scheme in 1972 for the benefit of its employees.
       On 28th November, 1988 the RSEB made the Employees Pension Regulations, 1988 and the Employees General Provident Fund Regulations, 1988.
       Both the set of regulations came into effect on 28th November, 1988 and the existing employees of the RSEB on the cut-off date were entitled to exercise an option of either continuing as members of the existing CPF Scheme or switching to the Pension Scheme and the GPF Scheme under the Pension Regulations and the GPF Regulations respectively within a period of 90 days from the date of commencement of the GPF Scheme. Such of the employees of the RSEB, who joined after 28th November, 1988 were automatically governed by the Pension Regulations and the GPF Regulations. The switch-over option was, therefore, available to only those employees who were on the rolls of the RSEB on the cut-off date.
       On 6th January, 1989 the RSEB issued a notice giving an option to the existing employees (including the respondents) to switch over from the existing CPF Scheme to the Pension and GPF Regulations.
       The notice stated, inter alia, that the switch-over option should be exercised by the employee in writing within a period of 90 days from the date of its issue. This period was extended in eight installments up to 30th June, 1997 and closed thereafter.
       A large number of aggrieved employees of the RSEB filed Writ Petitions in the Rajasthan High Court. In these Writ Petitions the challenge was to the closure of the switch-over option. The writ petitioners also claimed a declaration of being entitled to all the pension benefits available under the Pension and GPF Regulations upon their retirement. These Writ Petitions were disposed of by a Single Judge of the High Court with a direction that the writ petitioners may submit a representation to the RSEB voicing their grievances and the RSEB should decide the representation within a month.
       By an extremely detailed order the RSEB disposed of these representations in which the issues raised were clearly formulated and findings given on each of the issues.
       A large number of writ petitions were filed challenging that order and praying for quashing and setting aside the decision. This batch of Writ Petitions was heard by a Single Judge and by his elaborate judgment and order the writ petitions were allowed.
       The RSEB preferred writ appeals which were dismissed.
       Finding of the Court:
       An employee must give his option for either continuing to be a member of the CPF Scheme or to switch over to the Pension and GPF Regulations. The right of an employee to switch over was, therefore, limited in time by the Pension and GPF Regulations.
       Result: All the appeals are allowed but with no order as to costs. Insofar as Civil Appeals arising out of SLP (C) No.30577 of 2012, SLP (C) No.9990 of 2013 and SLP (C) No.9983 of 2013 are concerned they are remitted to a Single Judge of the High Court for a fresh consideration on merits.

JUDGMENT :

Madan B. Lokur, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The primary question for consideration in all these appeals is whether the respondents were entitled, as of right, to one more opportunity to switch-over from the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme of which they were members, to the Pension Scheme and the General Provident Fund Scheme implemented by the appellant with effect from 28th November, 1988?

Broadly speaking, the contention of the respondents is that they were unaware of the switch-over option since they were posted in remote areas of Rajasthan, while the contention of the appellant is that a large number of opportunities extending over 8 years were given to the respondents to exercise the switchover option and that they could not claim any right to any further opportunity to make the switch over.

3. In our opinion, the contention of the appellant must be accepted and the impugned judgment and order dated 17th May, 2012 accepting the contention of the respondents has to be set aside.

The facts

4. The Rajasthan State Electricity Board (for short ‘the RSEB’) had introduced a Contributory Provident Fund Scheme in 1972 (for short ‘the CPF Scheme’) for the benefit of its employees. This was in exercise of powers conferred by the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.

5. On 28th November, 1988 the RSEB, in exercise of powers conferred by Section 79 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 made the Employees Pension Regulations, 1988 (for short ‘the Pension Regulations’) and the Employees General Provident Fund Regulations, 1988 (for short ‘the GPF Regulations’).

6. Both the set of regulations came into effect on 28th November, 1988 and the existing employees of the RSEB on the cut-off date were entitled to exercise an option of either continuing as members of the existing CPF Scheme or switching to the Pension Scheme and the GPF Scheme under the Pension Regulations and the GPF Regulations respectively within a period of 90 days from the date of commencement of the GPF Scheme. Such of the employees of the RSEB, who joined after 28th November, 1988 were automatically governed by the Pension Regulations and the GPF Regulations. The switch-over option was, therefore, available to only those employees who were on the rolls of the RSEB on the cut-off date.

7. On 6th January, 1989 the RSEB issued a notice giving an option to the existing employees (including the respondents) to switch over from the existing CPF Scheme to the Pension and GPF Regulations.

8. The notice stated, inter alia, that the switch-over option should be exercised by the employee in writing within a period of 90 days from the date of its issue and that no request for extension of time, seeking clarification or review would be entertained. Significantly, it was stated in the notice that if an employee does not exercise his clear option within the specified time limit, he shall be deemed to have retained the benefits available to him under the CPF Scheme to which he was already entitled. The notice set out the procedure for exercising the option, which is forwarding it to the concerned officers.

9. The notice also stated that it should be given wide publicity by pasting it on the notice board of various offices under the RSEB. It was stated in the notice that pasting would be treated as sufficient notice for all the Board employees for whom it was intended.

10. The respondents did not exercise their option in terms of the notice dated 6th January, 1989 although as many as 2741 employees exercised their switch-over option.

11. The RSEB issued a second notice dated 4th April, 1989 extending the period for exercising the switch-over option for another 45 days after the expiry of the period of the first option of 90 days given in the first notice dated 6th January, 1989. The second notice was issued since the first notice was not published in Hindi w

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2014 Supreme(SC) 575

Cases Referred (2)