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

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA, J, PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, A
Srinivassan.K – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. N.R.Routray
For the Respondents: Mr. A.C.Deo

ORDER

PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A):

Brief case of the applicants is that pursuant to notification dated 05.05.2017 (A/1) to fill up different category of non-faculty posts (Group-B), applicants applied and appeared at the selection. As per clause (viii) [Other information for the candidates] of the said notification, “the employees of the Institute will be governed by the New Pension Scheme as per the provision contained in the Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs (ECB & PR Division). Notification No. 5/7/2003-ECB& PR dated 22.12.2003. However, pay protection and continuation of past services of the existing Govt. employers selected to the post will be considered strictly as per the Rules”. On being successful in the aforesaid selection, they were issued with offer of appointment vide Annexure-A/3 series with the unambiguous term/condition at Sl. No. 18 that “you will be governed by “New Pension Scheme” as per G.O.I., Ministry of Finance, Notification No. 5/7/2003-ECB& PR dated 22.12.2003-Published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part-I, Section-I dated 22.12.2003 and as amended from time to time. In addition, pay protection and counting of past service will

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top