IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No.6067 of 2026 DATE:10.03.2026 BETWEEN:

Ch.Ravindra Babu ….Petitioner AND The Union of India, represented by its Secretary/Chairman, Department of Atomic Energy, Anushakti Bhavan, CSM Marg, Mumbai and 4 others.

….Respondents

ORDER

Heard Ms. Anita Swain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri N. Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents and perused the record.

2. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with the following prayer:-

“to issue any writ order or direction one more particularly in the nature of writ Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records from the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad bench i.e the 5th respondent and quash the order dated 06-02-2025 in O.A No 021/716 of 2023 by declaring it as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violation of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the constitution and contrary to law and consequently, direct the respondents to convert the petitioner from the Contributory Provident Fund to General Provident Fund Scheme and pay pension from the date of his retirement viz. 31.07.2012 on par with other similarly situated persons and consequently pay the arrears of pension and other benefits the petitioner is entitled to as per the GPF scheme within the time frame stipulated by this Court and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit just and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

3. The core dispute centres around the interpretation of various Office Memoranda (hereinafter referred to as “OMs”) issued by the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) and the Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare (DP&PW) concerning the option available to technical staff to elect either the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme (hereinafter “CPF Scheme”) or the Pension Scheme. It is the petitioner’s case that upon his confirmation in a permanent technical post, he never exercised any option to continue under the CPF Scheme and, by virtue of the deeming clause contained in the OM dated 17.01.1967, he must be treated as having opted for the Pension Scheme.

Factual matrix (in brief)

4. The petitioner entered the service of the 2^nd respondent– Nuclear Fuel Complex (NFC), a unit under the DAE, as Technical Assistant ‘A’ (Group-C, Non-Gazetted) on 22.09.1977 and was confirmed in the said post on 31.03.1983. The post held by the petitioner falls within the ‘Technical’ category in the classification of employees under the DAE, which broadly comprises Scientific, Technical, Administrative and Auxiliary streams. The petitioner continued in service until his superannuation on 31.07.2012, rendering nearly thirty-five years of service. During the course of his service, the petitioner remained a subscriber to the CPF Scheme, and upon retirement he withdrew the accumulated CPF benefits.

5. The framework governing the pensionary benefits of Technical personnel in the DAE traces its origin to Office Memorandum No.37/55/63-T.II(A)TE dated 17.01.1967 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1967 OM”). The said Office Memorandum regulates the option available to technical employees to either continue under the CPF Scheme or opt for the Pension Scheme. The said Office Memorandum is extracted below for ready reference:

Office Memorandum Sub: Grant of benefits under the Contributory Provident Fund and Pension Schemes to substantive holders of permanent Scientific Technical Posts in the Department of Atomic Energy.

The undersigned is directed to invite a reference to this Department Office Memorandum No.37/55/63-Tech.II(A) dated April 17, 1964 on the subject mentioned above and to state that the extension of the benefits listed therein to the technical personnel (holders of posts other than those classified as technical) has since been considered and the President is plea