A retired employee who has accepted pro rata pensionary benefits upon permanent absorption into an autonomous body without timely challenging the underlying administrative sanction cannot later seek the calculation of pension based on combined service, especially when the autonomous body lacks an independent pension scheme.

O R D E R

(Hon'ble Ms. Veena Kothavale, Member(J)

It is the case of the applicant that he joined the Central Government service on 10/05/1982 as a Vocational Instructor in the Vocational Rehabilitation Centre for Physically Handicapped at Bangalore. In the year 1990, he was transferred from Labour wing of the Labour Ministry to the Technical wing of the same Ministry i.e., to National Instructional Media Institute (NIMI). In the year 2010, NIMI was declared an autonomous body. However, it was agreed that applicant would continue to work as a Central Government employee under the Central Government rules and regulations and would be entitled to continuous service and pensionary benefits as a Central Government employee.

2. After 2010, confusion prevailed as there was no clarity on the applicable service rules. As NIMI had not framed any service rules, the pay of applicant was fixed by NIMI arbitrarily, without basing it on any criteria or any framed rules and regulations of NIMI. Consequently, several benefits which the applicant was entitled to were either denied to him or were modified without his consent.

3. The 2nd respondent had issued an Office Order dated 31/03/2008 which inter alia provided as under: -

"Those who will be absorbed in this Autonomous Institute shall have an option to receive pro rata retirement benefits or continue to have the benefit of combined service under the Government and in the Autonomous Body subject to the conditions laid down in the Department of Personnel and A.R.'S O. M. No. 28/10/84-PU, dated the 29thAugust, 1984 and 12th September 1985. Such option should be exercised within six months from the date of permanent absorption. In case no option is exercised within stipulated period, he/she will be eligible for pension based on combined service".

4. Despite the above Office Order, neither the technical resignations were obtained from the employees transferred to NIMI, nor were they asked to exercise the option within stipulated period. As NIMI failed to follow the procedure prescribed for an autonomous body when the Central Government employees are absorbed in such body, the employees continued to be Central Government employees. Therefore, it is stated by the applicant that he continued to be a Central Government employee and was governed under the Central Government Civil Service Rules.

5. Further, as per the above Office Order dated 31/03/2008, though the applicant was entitled to the benefit of combined service under the Central Government and in the Autonomous Body, he was denied the service benefits of a Central Government employee. Apart from improper fixation of pay, applicant's ACP / MACP was wrongly fixed. Initially, respondents had denied him the benefits of ACP /MACP stating that there was no continuity of service. After huge delay, two ACPs were granted in the year of 1999 and 2006. MACP benefits on completion of his 30 years' service was also wrongly fixed as Rs.4800/- GP instead of Rs.6600/- GP. When the applicant superannuated in 2015, he was issued two separate retirement orders instead of a single retirement order with continuity of service. It is stated by the applicant that he is entitled to receive similar benefits granted to similarly placed persons. While NIMI granted all service benefits of a Central Government employee to one M. Sudhakar Varma who was similarly placed as the applicant when he retired on 26/02/2011, the same has been denied to the applicant.

6. As applicant's representations were not responded to by the respondents, applican