Eligibility for old pension scheme denied based on government policy for appointments made after specified date; courts refrain from altering policy decisions absent clear perversity.

JUDGMENT :

Nirzar S. Desai, J.

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Rohan Majmudar for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Henil Shah for respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

2. By way of the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the action of respondent authorities of not applying old pension scheme to the petitioner and has further prayed for a direction to the authority to apply old pension scheme in the case of the petitioner and further direction to authorities to open a GPF account of the petitioner. The petitioner has further prayed for quashing and setting aside a communication dated 08.08.2025 issued by respondent No. 4 whereby the petitioner was denied the benefit of old pension scheme. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing and setting aside the communication dated 24.07.2025 whereby the respondents have issued instructions that in case any of the persons who was appointed after 01.04.2025 and yet if his GPF account is opened then in that case such GPF account is required to be closed. Thereafter, the petitioner has further prayed for seeking modification in the Government Resolution dated 08.11.2024 to the extend that the benefit of the said Government Resolution be made applicable in case of petitioner who is appointed on compassionate basis. Lastly, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the authorities to consider and decide the representation made by the petitioner in light of Government Resolution dated 08.11.2024.

3. It is case of the petitioner as submitted by learned advocate Mr. Rohan Majmudar for the petitioner that the father of the petitioner expired on 29.12.1998 while he was in service and therefore the petitioner made an application for compassionate appointment on 02.08.2004 which was favourably considered and the petitioner was granted appointment vide order dated 25.01.2006 as Talati-cum-Mantri/ Panchayat Sahayak. Initially, the appointment of the petitioner was on fixed pay and on 13.12.2011 the petitioner was placed into regular pay sale and thereafter since the new pension scheme is applied to the petitioner and considering the fact that subsequently vide Government Resolution dated 08.11.2024 it was resolved by the State Government that in case of competitive exams when the entire recruitment process was over prior 01.04.2005 but appointments was given post 01.04.2005. The candidates who are appointed after 01.04.2005 be granted the benefits of old pension scheme, the petitioner is seeking benefit of the said Government Resolution by seeking modification in the said Government Resolution .

4. Learned advocate Mr. Rohan Majmudar appearing for the petitioner has made following submissions:-

4.1 That the petitioner is victim of circumstances and though the father of the petitioner died in the year 1998 and the petitioner had made an application for compassionate appointment way back in the year 2004 and was appointed only in the year 2006 and in between the new pension scheme had come into force w.e.f. 01.04.2005 and therefore the benefit of Government Resolution dated 08.11.2024 is required to be extended to the petitioner by modifying the Government Resolution.

4.2 That the petitioner made an application for compassionate appointment in the year 2004 itself and therefore, whatever delay had occurred in appointing the petitioner can be attributed to the respondent and therefore the petitioner should be granted the benefit of old pension scheme.

4.3 That in some of the District, some of the persons who were appointed even after 01.04.2005 on compassionate grounds are also given the benefit of old pension scheme an