LexRAJASTHAN AGRICULTURE UNIVERSITY, BIKANER versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2013] 9 S.C.R. 276 A RAJASTHAN AGRICULTURE UNIVERSITY, BIKANER B v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 7160 of 2013) AUGUST 27, 2013 [ANH,. R. DAVE AND DIPAK MISRA, JJ.] Service Law: Retiral benefits - CPF Scheme and Pension Scheme - C Belated option of employee for CPF scheme accepted by employer - After getting retiral benefits accordingly, employee claiming benefit of Pension Scheme - Held: A special favour · was done to respondent by appellant University by accepting his option even after the prescribed period was over, and, D therefore, he cannot be permitted to take undue advantage of the same - Notification No. Pension/RAJAUIC/91/F-751 3668-768 dated 17.8.1991. Respondent No. 2, while in employment of the E appellant-University, belatedly opted for the C.P.F. Scheme, which was accepted by the appellant-University. On his retirement from the appellant-University, he was paid all his retirement benefits payable to him under the C.P.F. Scheme. Thereafter, he approached the University F stating that as he had not-exercised his option within the prescribed period of 3 months from the date of the Notification dated 17 .08.1991, as per the conditions incorporated in the said Notification, he should .have been deemed to have opted for the Pension Scheme and, therefore, he should be paid pension as per the Pension G Scheme. The University did not accept the prayer. Respondent No. 2 then filed a writ petition, which was allowed by the single Judge of the High Court, giving a direction to the appellant-University to consider his case. The Division Bench of the High Court directed the · H 276 RAJASTHAN AGRICULTURE UNIVERSITY, BIKANER 277 v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN appellant-University to give pension to respondent No. 2. A. Allowing the appeal, the Court. HELD: Though, respondent No. 2 had not exercised his option within the period prescribed under the Notification dated 17 .8.1991, but when he exercised the B option on 3.1.1992, for continuing to be under the C.P .F. Scheme and the appellant-University accepted the same, he would not get benefit under the deeming fiction incorporated in the Notification. It was his conscious effort to see that he continues with the C.P.F. Scheme. A c special favour was done to respondent No. 2 by the employer by accepting his option ever after the prescribed period was over, and, therefore, ·he cannot be permitted to take undue advantage of the same. The High Court was in error by giving a direction to the appellant- 0 University that respondent No. 2 should be given pension as if he had opted for the Pension Scheme. [para 22,24 and 25] [282-8-C, F-G] CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 7160 of 2013. From the Judgment & Order dated 20.01.2011 of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur in D.B. Civil Special Appeal (W) No. 32 of 2008. E Dr. Manish Singhvi, AAG, Pragati Neekhra, H.D. Thanvi, Rishi Motoliya, Preeti Thanvi, Sarad Kumar Singhania, S.S. F Shamshery, V.M. Vishnu, Arun Bhardwaj, Bharat Sood, C.S. Ashri, Milind Kumar for the appearing parties. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ANIL R. DAVE, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. Being aggrieved by the judgment delivered in D.B. Civil G Special Appeal (Writ) No. 32 of 2008 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1738 of 2003 dated 20th January, 2011, by the High Court of Rajasthan, the Rajasthan Agriculture University has filed this appeal. 3. The facts giving rise to the present appeal, in a nutshell, H 278 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ·[2013] 9 S.C.R. A are as under:- '19/ Respondent No. 2 was in employment of the appellant- University. Prior to his employment under the appellant- University, respondent No. 2 had worked with the State of Rajasthan in Veterinary.& Animal Husbandry Department. After 8 taking voluntary retirement from his State service, he had joined the erstwhile Mohanlal Sukhadia University, Udaipur. Subsequently, the said university had been bifurcated and the appellant-University was formed. Service of respondent No. 2 had been taken over by the appellant-University. 4. The question which is to be decided is whether C respondent No. 2 is entitled to pension as claimed by him or he is eligible to get his retirement benefits under Contributory Provident Funds Scheme (for short "the C.P.F. Scheme"). 5. Upon taking voluntary retirement from the State of Rajasthan, respondent No. 2 is getting pension from the Sta
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.