Raj.Rajya Vidyut V Nigam Ltd vs Dwarka Prasad Koolwal & Ors

The facts

7. On 6th January, 1989 the RSEB issued a notice giving an option to the existing employees (including the respondents) to switch over from the existing CPF Scheme to the Pension and GPF Regulations.

9. The notice also stated that it should be given wide publicity by pasting it on the notice board of various offices under the RSEB. It was stated in the notice that pasting would be treated as sufficient notice for all the Board employees for whom it was intended.

11. The RSEB issued a second notice dated 4th April, 1989 extending the period for exercising the switch-over option for another 45 days after the expiry of the period of the first option of 90 days given in the first notice dated 6th January, 1989. The second notice was issued since the first notice was not published in Hindi which inhibited the employees of the RSEB in exercising the switch-over option within the prescribed time limit.

12. The second notice did not mention anything about giving it wide publicity but it appears that in keeping with the mandate mentioned in the first notice dated 6th January, 1989 this notice too was given wide publicity since it resulted in as many as 31,217 employees exercising their switch-over option within the period of 45 days.

15. The RSEB issued a fourth notice dated 17th September, 1991 extending the time limit for exercising the switch-over option by a further period of 90 days. This was on the basis of references having been made to the RSEB from ‘various corners’ to allow one more opportunity to exercise the option for obtaining the benefits under the Pension and GPF Regulations. The fourth notice mentioned that in case an employee did not exercise the option within the period of 90 days it would be deemed that he had retained the benefits available to him under the CPF Scheme. In response to the fourth notice, as many as 2741 employees of the RSEB exercised their option.

17. It was stated that the work charge employees of the RSEB who were absorbed/appointed on a regular basis would be allowed to exercise the switch-over option subject to certain conditions. The option to switch over was to be exercised in writing up to 15th March, 1993 that is within a period of about 45 days. It was specifically stated in the order that those employees who do not exercise the option within the aforesaid period would be deemed to have retained the benefits under the CPF Scheme. The benefit of the order dated 27th January, 1993 was also extended to those work charge employees who were brought on a regular post on or after 28th November, 1988 but had died before exercising their option. In respect of these persons, the order stated that they would be deemed to have opted for pension unless the members of the family of the deceased specifically make a request that they may be paid CPF benefits due to the deceased. This order also conferred a benefit on those employees of the RSEB who had retired after 28th November, 1988 but prior to the issue of the order and had received the retirement benefits admissible under the CPF Scheme. They too were made entitled to exercise the switch-over option subject to certain conditions. As many as 2749 employees exercised their option in response to the fifth notice.

19. A seventh notice was issued by the RSEB on 22nd August, 1995 as a result of representations received from retired employees who desired to switch to the Pension and GPF Regulations but had failed to avail of the opportunity despite the notice dated 17th September, 1991 either because of ignorance or some erroneous understanding. The period for exercising the option was available till 30th November, 1995. The notice mentioned that pasting the seventh notice on the notice boards of the various offices of the RSEB would be treated as sufficient notice to all the retired employees of the RSEB.

22. In the meanwhile, a meeting of the Whole-Time Members of the RSEB and the Heads of Department was held on 4th January, 1995 in which it was decided, inter alia, that although the last date for exercising the switch- over option had expired in 1991, representations were being received to extend the date. Therefore, looking into the difficulty faced by the employees, it was decided that the facility of exercising the switch-over option would be available to the existing employees up to six months prior to the date of retirement, that is, the employee could opt for Pension and GPF Regulations while in service. According to the respondents, by virtue of this decision, such of the employees who are still in service can yet accept the switch-over option. But according to the RSEB, the decision taken on 4th January, 1995 stands obliterated by the sixth notice given on 8th May, 1995, the seventh notice given on 22nd August, 1995 and the eighth notice given on 4th February, 1997 read with the final decision taken on 12th March, 1999 closing the receipt of switch-over options.

24. Consequent to the decision communicated on 12th March, 1999 whereby the option of switching over from the CPF Scheme to the Pension and GPF Regulations was not extended, a large number of aggrieved employees of the RSEB filed Writ Petitions in the Rajasthan High Court. In these Writ Petitions the challenge was to the closure of the switch-over option. The writ petitioners also claimed a declaration of being entitled to all the pension benefits available under the Pension and GPF Regulations upon their retirement. These Writ Petitions came to be disposed of by a learned Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court by an order dated 28th February, 2008 with a direction that the writ petitioners may submit a representation to the RSEB voicing their grievances and the RSEB should decide the representation within a month.

26. Not being satisfied with the order dated 26th June, 2008 a large number of writ petitions came to be filed in the Rajasthan High Court challenging that order and praying for quashing and setting aside the decision dated 12th March, 1999. It was further prayed that the writ petitioners (who are respondents before us) be held entitled to the benefits in accordance with the Pension and GPF Regulations. This batch of Writ Petitions was heard by a learned Single Judge and by his elaborate judgment and order dated 21st October, 2011 the writ petitions were allowed and the communication dated 26th June, 2008 as well as the decision dated 12th March, 1999 were quashed and set aside. It was made clear that all the existing employees of the RSEB would be covered by the Pension and GPF Regulations including the writ petitioners and the legal representatives of the deceased employees interested in exercising the switch-over option from the CPF to the Pension and GPF Regulations. It was further directed that there was no need for any other writ petition to be filed by any existing employee and that the benefit of the order dated 21st October, 2011 would inure to the benefit of all similarly situate employees.

Findings Issue 3:

64. As regards the Pension Scheme, the admitted position is that an employee could not continue with the CPF Scheme and also avail the benefits of the Pension Scheme under the Employees Pension Regulations, 1988. However, an employee could avail of both the GPF Scheme as well as the Pension Scheme.

71. Under the circumstances, we find no merit in the contentions urged by the respondents and consequently, the appeals of the RSEB deserve to be allowed.

Civil Appeal No.7503/2014 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.30577 of 2012 (from Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.248 of 2012 in CWP No.13401 of 2008)

Civil Appeal No.7570/2014 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 9990 of 2013 (from Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 237 of 2012 in CWP No. 1079 of 2008)

Civil Appeal No.7564/2014 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 9983 of 2013 (from Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.257 of 2012 in CWP No. 12230 of 2009)

76. It is submitted that the writ petitioner exercised his option in 1996 and that was forwarded to the competent authority by his controlling officer (Executive Engineer at Bhilwara) by a letter dated 30th March, 1996. Though the option form was received well within time, it was not accepted.

Conclusion

80. All the appeals are allowed but with no order as to costs. Insofar as Civil Appeals arising out of SLP (C) No.30577 of 2012, SLP (C) No.9990 of 2013 and SLP (C) No.9983 of 2013 are concerned they are remitted to a Single Judge of the High Court for a fresh consideration on merits.