The liability to release pensionary benefits of employees seeking voluntary retirement under Rule 48A of the Pension Rules rested on the Pension Trust, as established in the judgments of Rosy Jain (supra), Mrs. Asha Joshi v. GNCTD of Delhi and Ors., and S.K. Goel v. M/s Tata Power Delhi Distribution Limited & Ors.

JUDGMENT

Jyoti Singh, J. (Oral)--Both the writ petitions are being disposed of by this judgment since they involve a similitude of facts and raise an identical question of law. Petitioners have sought the following reliefs:

"i. A writ/order/direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent/s for releasing all terminal dues & retirement benefits (Pending Pension from 01/04/2020) of the Petitioner.

And

ii. Pass an order thereby awarding cost, litigation and expenses in favour of the Petitioner."

2. Facts to the extent relevant for adjudicating the present writ petitions are that Petitioners were employees of Delhi Vidyut Board (`DVB') and opted for voluntary retirement under Rule 48A of Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as `Pension Rules') which were applicable to DVB employees. Petitioner in W.P.(C) 5368/2021 was relieved on voluntary retirement w.e.f. 01.07.2008 while Petitioner in W.P.(C) 5459/2021 was relieved on 03.10.2005.

3. After unbundling of DVB, Petitioners were transferred to Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd./Respondent No.2. Petitioners started receiving their pension from the DISCOM, however, subsequently they received letters dated 23.01.2020 from Respondent No.2 intimating that a Division Bench of this Court in Tata Power Delhi Distribution Power Limited v. Smt. Rosy Jain and Ors., 2016 SCC OnLine Del 1650, has held that the liability to pay terminal and pensionary benefits to retirees under Rule 48A of Pension Rules from DISCOMS would rest on Delhi Vidyut Board Employees Terminal Benefit Fund, 2002/Respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as `Pension Trust'). On account of this, pensions of the Petitioners were stopped by the DISCOM from 01.04.2020.

4. This constrained the Petitioners to approach the Pension Trust for release of pension in terms of the judgment of this Court in Rosy Jain (supra). No relief was granted to the Petitioners and they sent further representations for release of the retiral benefits but to no avail and finally approached this Court.

5. Challenging the action of Pension Trust in not releasing the terminal and pensionary benefits, counsel for the Petitioners submits that the case of the Petitioners is squarely covered by the judgment of the Division Bench in Rosy Jain (supra) as well as subsequent judgments passed by this Court relying on the judgment of the Division Bench, wherein it is held that liability to release the pensionary benefits of employees seeking voluntary retirement under Rule 48A of Pension Rules would rest on the Pension Trust after their transfer from DVB on unbundling to the various DISCOMS.

6. Respondents are unable to dispute that the reliefs claimed by the Petitioners are covered on all four corners by the judgment in Rosy Jain (supra) as well as the subsequent judgments of this Court in Mrs. Asha Joshi v. GNCTD of Delhi and Ors., W.P.(C) 17416/2022 decided on 31.01.2023 and S.K. Goel v. M/s Tata Power Delhi Distribution Limited & Ors., W.P.(C) 656/2016 decided on 11.04.2023. Respondent No.2 has categorically stated in the counter affidavit that after the judgment was pronounced in Rosy Jain (supra), Respondent No.2 had written to the Pension Trust to release the pension of the Petitioners with arrears vide letter dated 23.01.2020 and pension papers were also forwarded. Pension Trust, on the other hand, takes a position that the liability rests with the DISCOMS and the Trust is not liable to pay the retiral benefits. In view of the judgment of the Division Bench, in my view, it is no longer open to the Pension Trust to take a conflicting position. In Rosy Jain (supra), the Division Bench while referring to the observations of this Court in North Delhi Power Ltd. v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi, 2007 SCC OnLine Del 919, (`SVRS Judgment') held that the Pension Trust cannot deny its liability towards employees retiring on voluntary retirement under Rule 48-A of the Pension Rules. Significantly, no appeal was filed by the Pension Trus