ORDER :

VIVEK RUSIA, J.

Vide order dt. 4-10-2023, learned counsel appearing for the respondents was directed to examine as to whether the controversy involved in this writ petition has been resolved by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of University of Delhi vs. Smt. Shashi Kiran and others ETC, reported in (2022) 15 SCC 325.

2. Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that this matter is not covered by the aforesaid judgment as the University of Delhi granted various extensions to its staff for giving consent for shifting from CPF to GPF but in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan no such extensions were granted. Learned counsel has made the statement on oral instructions.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that before the learned Tribunal the judgment passed in the case of University of Delhi (supra) was cited, but the learned Tribunal did not consider the same. Thereafter the issue has been settled and the similar petitions filed by the ex-employees of Kendriya Vidyalaya has been allowed by High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Bench at Jaipur against which the SLP has been dismissed.

4. Facts of the case in short are as under :

(i) The petitioner was appointed in the year 1973 in the establishment of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan. According to him, he submitted an application in the year 1983 for opting GPF scheme, but the same was not considered. In the year 1987, the scheme was introduced in the respondents department for introducing the GPF to its employees. As per clause 3.2 of the policy, any employee intended to opt for CPF has to submit an application/option and the person who has not opted for CPF will automatically cover by the GPF, for which a cut off date was fixed on 30-9-1987. The petitioner exercised the option on 16-1-1989 for continuance in CPF as final and irrevocable. A copy of the same is on record at page No. 113. The petitioner continued under the said scheme till retirement in the year 2008. After retirement, the petitioner submitted an application requesting respondents for conversion from CPF to GPF but the same was rejected. Hence, the petitioner approached the Central Administrative Tribunal by way of filing Original Application No. 202/00742/2021.

(ii) The respondent Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan filed the reply by submitting that the respondent Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan is an autonomous organization registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 in order to cater the educational need of the children of the Central Government Employees appointed on the transferable posts. At the time of filing return, there were 1250 Kendriya Vidyalayas including 3 in abroad were functioning. It is submitted that the petitioner opted to continue in CPF scheme on 16-1-1989. Accordingly, he was allotted revised CPF account, which continued till his retirement. During service he never objected it and never applied for change and now the present OA is also barred by limitation. Therefore, O.A. is liable to be dismissed.

(iii) After considering the material available on record, the Central Administrative Tribunal vide order dated 28-3-2023 dismissed the O.A. as the O.A. sans merit. Hence this petition.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

6. On 6-6-1985 the Central Government employees were governed by the Contributory Provident Fund in short ‘CPF’ and they were permitted to opt for General Provident Fund and Pension Scheme in short ‘GPF’. Thereafter, a notification was issued by the Central Government with respect to change over of the existing employees from CPF to GPF. As per notification dt. 1-5-1987, all the CPF beneficiaries, who were in service on 1-1-1986 and were still in service would be deemed to have come over to the GPF unless contrary option was exercised by them in writing by 30-9-1987. Therefore, by 30-9-1987 all the employees have deemed to have been come over in the GPF unless contrary option was exercised by them. On 30-9-1987 the petitioner had already been switch