LexNATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR. versus KIRPAL SINGH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c [2014] 1 S.C.R. 380 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR. v. KIRPAL SINGH (Civil Appeal No. 256 of 2014) JANUARY 10, 2014 [T.S. THAKUR AND VIKRAMAJIT SEN, JJ.] General Insurance Employees Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2004: Para 3, 5 and 6 - Vo/unary retirement Scheme - Eligibility - Qualifying service - Held In view of para 6 of SVRs of 2004 and Para 14 of Pension Scheme of 1995, any employee retiring from service of company/corporation would 0 qualify for payment of pension if he/she has rendered a minimum of ten years of service on the date of retirement - Since para 29 and 30 of Pension Scheme 1995 do not govem the entitlement for those seeking the benefit of SVRS of 2004, para 14 can be invoked, which prescribes a qualifying service E of ten years only as a condition of eligibility - Expression "retirement' appearing in Para 14 of Pension scheme 1995 should not only apply to cases which fall under Para 30 of the said scheme but also to a case falling under SVRS of 2004 - Thus, those opting for voluntary retirement under SVRS of 2004 would also qualify for payment of pension as they had F put in the qualifying service of ten years stipulated under Para 14 of Pension Scheme 1995 - General Insurance (Employees) Pension Scheme, 1995 - Para 14, 29 and 30. G H Words and Phrases: Word 'means' and the expression, "unless the context otherwise requires" - Connotation of- Interpretation of statues. The respondents opted for voluntary retirement in 380 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR. v. KIRPAL 381 SINGH terms of the General Insurance Employees Special .A Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2004 (SVRS of 2004), and claimed ;pension as one of the benefits admissible to them under para 6 thereof. The claim was rejected by the appellants on the :ground that in terms of para 6 of SVRS of 2004, pension would be admissible to those seeking B voluntary r.etirement only if they were eligible for the same under the General lns1uance (Employees) Pension Scheme., 1995 (Pension Scheme 1995) and Para 30 of the Pension :Scheme 1995 made only such em.ployees eligible for pension who had completed twenty years of c qualifying service; and as the .respondents had not completed twenty years of qualify.ing service on the date of their voluntary retirement, they were not eligible for pension 1995. The writ petitions filed by the respondents were allowed ho1ding the respondents to be entitled to 0 claim pension. Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.·1 • .A conjoint reading of para 6 of SVRS of 2004 and para 14 of the Pension Scheme 1995, would E leave no manner·of doubt that any employee retiring from the service of the company/corporation would qualify for payment .of pension if he/she has rendered a minimum of ten years .of service on the date .of retirement. [para 7] [387-G] F 1.2. Para 29 and Para 30 of the Pension Scheme 1995 provides for '"superannuation pension" and "pension on voluntary retirement", .respectively. The SVRS of 2004 does not obviously rest the claim for payment of pension on any one of the said two provisions. That is because G what is claimed by the employees- respondents ·is not superannuation pension nor is it pension on voluntary retirement within the meaning of para 30. As a matter of fact, para 6 (1 )(c} of the SVRS of 2004 s~pecif.ically provides that the notional benefit of additional five years H 382 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014} 1 S.C.R. A to be added to the service of the retiring employee as stipulated in para 30 of the pension scheme shall not be admissible for purposes of determining the quantum of pension and commutation of pension. It follows that the SVRS of 2004 did not for the purposes of grant of B pension adopt the scheme underlying para 30 of the Pension Scheme 1995. [para 10-11) [389-F-H; 390-E-G] 1.3. The provisions of para 6 of the SVRS of 2004 read with para 14 of the Pension Scheme 1995 which C stipulates only ten years qualifying service for an employee who retires from service to entitle him to claim pension would entitle those retiring pursuant to the SVRS of 2004 also to claim pension. Since paras 29 and 30 of the Pension Scheme 1995 do not govern the 0 entitlement for those seeking the benefit of SVRS of 2004, para 14 can be invoked, which prescribes a qualifying service of ten years only as a condition of eligibility. Not only because the provision for payment of pension is a ben
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.