Cut-off dates for pensions set by executive bodies are permissible as long as they are reasonable and rational, and do not constitute discrimination under constitutional equality provisions.

JUDGMENT

(By J.Nisha Banu,J.)

This Writ Appeal has been directed against the order dated 28.01.2022 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.9346 of 2014.

2. The brief facts, which led to the filing of the present appeal are as follows:

2.1 The National Confederation of BHEL Retired Employees Association, the Appellant herein was constituted for the welfare of the Retired BHEL Employees. The BHEL is the Government of India undertaking.

2.2 The case of the Appellant is that the retired employees of the BHEL have made representations seeking for sanction of the pension since prior from the year 2000. The Government of India have appointed the pay revision committee and based on its Report, an official Memorandum dated 26.11.2008 was issued, wherein superannuation benefits were also prescribed. The only condition imposed in the said Memorandum that 15 years minimum service in the CPSE prior to superannuation should have been completed. However, the BHEL by its Circular, dated 07.06.2012 introduced BHEL Employees Pension Scheme applicable to those who are on rolls of the company as on 01.01.2007 and onwards, without following the Govt. of India's Memorandum dated 26/11/2008. The BHEL also passed another Circular dated 10.07.2013 introduced BHEL Emergency Needs Mitigation Scheme (ENMS) applicable to the employees who retired from the company prior to 01.01.2007, though it was not financially beneficial to the retirees and further it is not in vogue as on date.

2.3 It is further case of the appellant that the BHEL have issued two different schemes, fixing the cut-off date of retirement as 01.01.2007 which is arbitrary illegal against law. Therefore, challenging the above said Circular, the Appellant Association filed W.P.No.9346 of 2014 on the ground that fixing the cut-off date classifying the retired employees prior and after 01.01.2007 is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and for consequential direction to the respondents to consider the representation made by the Appellant Association and to pay uniform pension to all the retired employees by fixing the scale of pay notionally with effect from 01.01.2007 with interest.

2.4 Before the learned Judge, it was argued on behalf of the appellant that by introducing the Pension Scheme only to those who were on rolls on 01.01.2007, has created a class within a class and all BHEL retirees, irrespective of the date of retirement, belong to one single, homogeneous, identifiable category/class/group and the date of retirement is purely incidental and it should not confer some benefit to one and deprive the other of the same benefit and the classification made by the BHEL vide order dated 07.06.2012, as pre and post 2007 retirees is arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India .

2.5 On behalf of the BHEL, it was argued that BHEL introduced a scheme which provides that a part of the current wage increase due to the concerned categories of employees as from 01.01.2007 would be kept in deposit with the Pension Fund and after retirement, along with accumulation standing to the credit of the member, an annuity is purchased which will provide for pension to the retirees, while the past retirees, viz., prior to 01.01.2007, they were not entitled to any wage increase and consequently, there is no question of making any contribution to pension fund in respect of them nor they can make any contribution for the past service.

3. On consideration of the contentions put forth by both sides, the learned Judge,