IMPORTANT POINT
Employees of autonomous bodies cannot claim pension benefits on par with government employees unless formally adopted by the governing body.

ORDER :

1. The present appeals emanate from the judgment dated 11.02.2020, wherein and whereby, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petitions filed by the appellants-employees seeking benefit of pension under G.P.F. Scheme (General Provident Fund Scheme).

2. Learned Advocate for the appellants-employees, Mr. J.V. Japee, has submitted that Respondent-Gujarat Water Supply Sewerage Board and Gujarat Water Resources Development Corporation, are governed by the Rules and Regulations of the Institute by the Central Government as well as the State Government. He has referred to the Office Memorandum dated 01.05.1987 issued by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare, Government of India and has submitted that by this Office Memorandum, 4th Central Pay Commission recommended that all the G.P.F. Beneficiaries in service on 01.01.1986 should be deemed to have come over the pension scheme.

3. Learned advocate for the appellants-employees, Mr. Japee has submitted that accordingly, the State Government was required to implement this and accordingly, the State Government Employees were granted the pension under the General Provident Fund Scheme, whereas the employees like the present appellants, who were serving in the respondent-Board/corporation, were left out and they are to be treated at par with the employees of the State Government.

4. Learned Advocate Mr. Japee for the appellants-employees has referred to the Government Resolution dated 07.01.1998 issued by the Finance Department of State Government, whereby the benefits arising from the 5th Pay Commission were extended to the Government Employees. He has submitted that as per the provisions of that Resolution, particularly, Para 12, the retirement benefits of all the government employees including the present appellants would be governed under the G.P.F. Scheme and not C.P.F. scheme. Learned advocate Mr. Japee has further referred to the board meeting of the Gujarat Water supply and Sewerage Board held on 11.02.1998 and has submitted that in such meeting, the board has adopted that all the employees will be paid the benefits of 5th Pay Commission.

5. Learned advocate Mr. Japee further referred to the circular dated 04.05.2002 and has submitted that as per the said circular issued by the State Government (Finance Department), the pay scales, which are being conferred to the employees of the State Government, are made applicable to the employees of the Board and hence, respondent-Board as well the Corporation have fell in error in not extending the benefits of G.P.F. Scheme to the appellants-employees.

6. Learned advocate Mr. Japee further stated that the learned Single Judge should have considered these aspects while dealing with the contentions raised by the rival parties in the judgment and he has also referred to the very judgment incorporated by the learned Single Judge in his judgment and has submitted that the judgment would, in fact, reveal that in identical cases, the employees, who were governed by the C.P.F. Scheme, were thereafter, directed by the concerned Courts including the judgment of this Court as well as Supreme Court to be governed by the New General Provident Fund Scheme and accordingly, they are to be conferred the benefits of pension. He has submitted that the employees, by not extending the benefits of pension to the appellants-employees, are suffering huge loss and it is urged that the order, passed by the learned Single Judge, may be required to be quashed and set aside and the writ petition may be allowed.

7. Per contra, learned advocate Mr. H.S. Munshaw has submitted that the respondent-Board is governed by its own provisions of law (Rules and Regulations). Learned advocate Mr. Munshaw has submitted that right from inception, when the appellants were appointed in service, they were governed by C.P.F. Scheme and after their retirement, they were all paid the benefits of C.P.F. He has submitted