A.N. SACHDEVA (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS. versus MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY, ROHTAK &ANR.

Citation: [2015] 8 S.C.R. 796 · Decided: 10-08-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.Y. EQBAL · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2015] 8 S.C.R. 796 
A 
A.N. SACHDEVA (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS. 
v. 
MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY, ROHTAK &ANR. 
(Civil Appeal Nos.626-627 of 2008) 
B 
AUGUST 10, 2015 
[M.Y. EQBALANDARUN MISHRA,JJ.) 
Service law - Retiral benefits - Pension - Counting of 
previous service as qualifying service for grant of pension -
C Service rendered by appellants in Kurukshetra University/ 
Punjab University is qualifying service for the purpose of 
pension, if can be added to the services rendered·by them in 
M.D. University- Held: In view of the principles enunciated 
D under Articles 14 and 16 and that the benefit is not ex gratia 
payment but a payment in recognition of past service, 
appellants entitled to the benefit of counting the past services 
as qualifying service subject to fulfilment of certain conditions 
specified in the memorandum - Merely because these 
E persons were directly appointed and others have been 
absorbed/allocated makes no difference as to the service -
Further, it is a case of upward revision of benefit -
.Classification sought to be created by the method of not 
extending benefit to persons appointed directly and by fixing 
F cut-off date not an intelligible classification but is 
discriminatory- M.D. University Pension Scheme, 1997- r. 
4(viii)- Constitution oflndia, 1950-Arts. 14, 15. 
G 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 It is apparent from the memorandum dated 
24.12.2001 that the first requirement to countthe services 
rendered in Punjab University/Kurukshetra University/ 
M.D. University by the appellants were without bmak and 
H continuous. It is not in dispute that after rendering the 
796 
A.N. SACHDEVA(DEAD) BY LRS. v. MAHARSHI 
797 
DAYANAND UNIVERSITY, ROHTAK 
services in Punjab University/Kurukshetra University, the A 
said employees had been directly appointed on the very 
next day in M.D. University. Earlier, the employees of 
Punjab University were allocated to Kurukshetra 
University and M.D. University used to be the regional 
centre of Kurukshetra University prior to its B 
establishment as full-fledged University. Second 
requirement of the memorandum dated 24.12.2001 is that 
the employer's share of the CPF has to be transferred to 
the pension fund with respect to services rendered in 
Punjab University/Kurukshetra University. The C 
appellants had expressed their willingness in their 
representation to fulfil the aforesaid requirement of the 
memorandum dated 24.12.2001 including all other 
requirements of the pension scheme. [Paras 12, 13) [808-
0 
G-H; 809-A-C] 
1.2 Considering the principles enunciated under 
Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, and thatthe benefit 
is not an ex gratia payment but a payment in recognition 
of past service, discrimination could not have been E 
made between those employees who have been 
absorbed/allocated are entitled to count their services 
as qualifying service for the purpose of pension and not 
those who have been appointed directly. Fact remains F 
that all these employees have served in Punjab 
University/Kurukshetra University/MD. University 
without any break. M.D. University, prior to its 
establishment, was the regional centre of Kurukshetra 
University. Expectation had arisen to compute the period G 
of service rendered in ·Punjab University/Kurukshetra 
University which cannot be unreasonably deprived of. 
Merely because a person has been appointed and others 
have been absorbed/allocated makes no difference as 
to the service rendered. Even otherwise, it is a case of H 
• 
798 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 8 S.C.R. 
A upward revision of benefit and the classification which 
is sought to be created by the said method of not 
extending benefit to persons appointed directly and by 
fixing cut-off date cannot be said to be intelligible one; 
same is discriminatory and thus, the appellants would 
B be entitled for the benefit from the date decision has 
been taken on 24.12.2001 to compute the previous 
service rendered in Punjab University/Kurukshetra 
University as qualifying service. In other words, they 
would be entitled for the benefit prospectively from the 
C date of issuance of memorandum dated 24.12.2001. The 
employees have expressed their willingness to deposit/ 
adjustment of the employer's contribution of CPF as 
required in the memorandum dated 24.12.2001. [Para 27] 
D [826-G-H; 827-A-E] 
1.3 The appellants are entitled for the benefit of 
counting the services rendered in Punjab University/ 
Korukshetra Univ

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.