SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(Ori) 789

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
A.S. Naidu, J.
BINOD KUMAR DAS AND OTHERS - APPELLANT
Versus
DIRECTOR-IN-CHARGE, (HRD), GRIDCO AND OTHERS - RESPONDENT
Writ Petition (C) No. 9515 of 2005
Decided On : 16-09-2008

Advocates Appeared:
P.K. Das, S.N. Nayak and S. Mohanty, for the Appellant; B.K. Patnaik, P. Sinha, P.K. Sahoo, R.K. Nayak and P.K. Panigrahi, for the Respondent

Employees who opted for the EPF Scheme and had their services taken over by another entity are not entitled to pension benefits under the OSEB Pension Scheme.

Headnote:

Pension Scheme - Retirement Benefits - OSEB Pension Scheme - EPF & MP Act - SBI v. L.Kannaiah and Ors. 2003 (II) LLJ 230

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, retired employees of OSEB, sought pensionary benefits under the OSEB Pension Scheme. They claimed that a corrigendum deprived them of pension, while the respondent argued that the petitioners had opted for the EPF Scheme and were not entitled to pension benefits.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioners' services were taken over by NTPC, and they had opted for the EPF Scheme, thus dismissing their belated claim for pension benefits.

Issues: Deprivation of pension benefits, classification of employees, locus standi to challenge the Resolution

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioners, having opted for the EPF Scheme and their services being taken over by NTPC, were not entitled to pension benefits under the OSEB Pension Scheme.

Final Decision: The Writ Petition was dismissed by the court.

JUDGMENT :

A.S. Naidu, J. - Twenty-three Petitioners who have retired from service have jointly filed this Writ Petition inter alia praying for issuance of direction to the opposite parties not to deprive them of pensionary benefits under the OSEB Pension Scheme and to modify the Corrigendum issued by the OSEB on 18-5-2005, vide Annexure-2.

2. According to the Petitioners they were initially appointed under the- Orissa State- Electricity Board (hereinafter called 'the OSEB' ) and thereafter were transferred to different organisations. After successful service, on attaining the age of superannuation they retired. They have averred that the Board of Directors of OSEB in its 90th Meeting Considering representation of some non-pensionary employees resolved to extend pensionary benefits to the persons who retired from service by 22nd December, 2004 under the Pension Scheme, but while issuing the Corrigendum dated 18th May, 2005 the words:

Any such non-pensionary employee' who has retired by 22-12-2004 or thereafter up to 2005 and willing to exercise option to, come over to the OSEB Pension Scheme Regulations "were inserted in place of "any such non-pensionary employee who has retired by 22-12-2004 and willing to exercise option to come over to the GRIDCO Pension Scheme/Regulations.

The Petitioners have averred that the word "thereafter" having been deleted by way of Corrigendum, they have been deprived of any pension.

3. Referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in SBI v. L.Kannaiah and Ors. 2003 (II) LLJ 230; Learned Counsel for the Petitioners submitted that deprivation of pension to employees served for more than twenty-four years would be a travesty of justice on the ground that they were not employees of OSEB though they were initially engaged by OSEB. Learned Counsel further submitted that classification of employees who once upon a time had been engaged in OSEB and depriving them of pension, greatly prejudices their right and as such is illegal.

4. After receiving notice, a return has been filed by the Orissa Power Transmission Corporation (for short 'OPTC') taking the stand that the employees of the erstwhile OSEB used to get provident fund under the Employees.' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions. Act, 1952 (for short 'EPF & MP Act'). There was No. Pension Scheme and for the first time OSEB introduced such a Scheme for its employees with effect from 1-4-1990 by Resolution dated 19-3-1991. The said Resolution clearly specified that only the existing employees who were already enjoying the benefits under the EPF Scheme could opt for Pension Scheme. The said resolution also stipulated that such employees who were not interested to come over to the new Pension Scheme might submit their unwillingness so as to reach the appointing authority latest by 30.9.1991 failing which it was to be construed that they were not willing to come over the Pension Scheme. In the counter-affidavit it has been specifically stated that a number of employees including the Petitioners submitted their written unwillingness to switch over to the Pension Scheme and preferred to continue under the EPF Scheme. Accordingly the Petitioners after their retirement received all the benefits flowing out of EPF Scheme. The further averment of the opposite parties is that except Petitioner Nos. 7, 8, 9 and 15 all other Petitioners were engaged in Talcher Thermal Power Station. By virtue of the Talcher Thermal Power Station (Acquisition and Transfer) Act, 1994, the Talcher Thermal Power Station was transferred and vested in the National Thermal Power Corporation Limited ( for short NTPC ) with effect From 3-5- 1995. Consequent upon such transfer, all the employees including the Petitioners except the aforesaid four Petitioners were permanently absorbed in NTPC. After their service in NTPC they retired and received all the retirement benefits from NTPC. Thus they have No. right to claim any retirement benefit from OSEB or its successor GRIDCompany

So far as P




Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top