Gaurav Bandhu vs Secretary to GOI, Department of Atomic Energy

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. A.V. Arun.
For the Respondents: Mr. K.S. Jeyaganeshan, Senior Panel Counsel.

Table of Content
1. common issues in writ petitions. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. employee pension options per om. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. tribunal ordered pension shift. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
4. dismissals based on previous decisions. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
5. proper procedure for pension switches. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
6. equal treatment in pension eligibility. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 25 , 26 , 27)
7. judicial decisions upheld unless challenged. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33)
8. belated option exercise permitted. (Para 34)
9. final decision on writ petitions. (Para 35)

ORDER :

V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.

Since the issue raised in all writ petitions are common, we clubbed the writ petitions together and heard the counsel.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as Writ Petitioners/employers and respondents/employees.

3. Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research (hereinafter referred to as ‘IGCAR’), Kalpakkam. Chennai has four categories of employees. They are

(i) Scientific;

(ii) Technical;

(iii) Auxiliary; and

(iv) Administration

4. As per the Office Memorandum dated 17.04.1964 and17.01.1967, technical employees were covered under the pension scheme. On confirmation, they wer