THE CALCUTTA PORT TRUST AND OTHERS versus ANADI KUMAR DAS (CAPT.) AND OTHERS

Citation: [2013] 12 S.C.R. 862 · Decided: 13-11-2013 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.S. SINGHVI · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2013] 12 S.C.R. 862 
THE CALCUITA PORT TRUST AND OTHERS 
v. 
ANADI KUMAR DAS (CAPT.) AND OTHERS 
(Civil Appeal No. 7148 of 2008) 
NOVEMBER 13, 2013 
[G.S. SINGHVI AND V. GOPALA GOWDA, JJ.] 
Service Law - Pension - Belated application for grant of 
opportunity to opt for pension scheme, after expiry of cut off 
C date - Maintainability - Held: If an aggneved retiree seeks 
intervention of the Court for issue of direction to the employer 
to give him opportunity to exercise option to switch over from 
one scheme to the other, the employer can produce evidence 
to show that the concerned employee had knowledge about 
D the particular scheme etc - The employer can also show that 
even though the scheme etc. had not been communicated 
to the concerned employee in person, he was aware of the 
same - It cannot be laid down as a general rule that each and 
every circular/instruction issued by the employer giving 
E additional monetary benefits to retired employees must be 
published in the newspapers and absence of such publication 
or personal communication to a retired employee would entitle 
him to seek intervention of the Court after lapse of many years 
- In the instant case, at the time of introduction of the Pension 
F Scheme, respondent No. 1 was very much in service of 
appellant no.1-Port Trust as a Class-I officer - Relevant 
circulars pertaining to Pension scheme were also issued 
during his service tenure - Therefore, it is not possible for any 
person of ordinary prudence to believe that respondent No. 1 
was not aware of the Pension Scheme and the opportunities 
G given to the retired employees/officers to exercise option to 
switch over from the CPF Scheme to the Pension Scheme -
Story put forth by respondent No. 1 of having acquired 
knowledge about the circulars issued in 1984 and 1986 from 
H 
862 
CALCUTTA PORT TRUST v. ANADI KUMAR DAS 
863 
(CAPT.) 
his friend/colleague rightly discarded by the Single Judge -
A 
Failure of respondent No. 1 to disclose the name of the 
concerned friend/colleague adequately supports the inference 
drawn by the Single Judge - Division Bench of the High Court 
committed serious error in interfering with the order of the 
Single Judge by entertaining the highly belated claim lodged 
B 
by respondept no. 1 in the year 2001 - However, keeping in 
view the peculiar facts of the case, appellants directed to allow 
respondent No. 1 to exercise option in terms of circular dated 
19.2.1986. 
Respondent No.1 joined the service of appellant C 
No.1-The Calcutta Port Trust on 19.8.1957 as Class-I 
Officer. At the time of appointment of respondent No.1, 
there was no Pension Scheme for the employees of 
appellant No.1 and they were given monetary benefits of 
the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme (CPF Scheme). 
D 
For the first time, Pension Scheme was introduced vide 
circular dated 29th May, 1962 and made effective from 
1.6.1962. All the existing employees, who were in service 
on 1.6.1962 were given the choice to opt for the Pension 
Scheme, but respondent No.1 did not exercise the 
E 
option. Respondent no.1 retired from service w.e.f. 
1.4.1983 under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme. Vide 
circular dated 11.8.1979, appellant No.1 extended the cut 
off date fixed for exercise of option under the Pension 
Scheme by Class-I and Class-II officers and fixed 
F 
9.11.1979 as the last date. Many officers opted for the 
Pension Scheme but respondent No.1 did not opt for the 
same. Similar options were given to the employees vide 
circulars dated 17.1.1981, 11.3.1981, 29.12.1984 and 
19.2.1986, but respondent No.1 did not avail any of the G 
opportunities. In the year 2000, the Central Government 
issued circular dated 7.1.2000 and sanctioned ex gratia 
at the rate of Rs.600 per month for the CPF beneficiaries. 
Respondent No.1 took benefit of that circular and 
received the amount of ex gratia. 
H 
864 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2013] 12 S.C.R. 
A 
In June 2001, the Government of India announced 
liberalized pensionary benefits for retired Class-I and 
Class-II officers of Major Ports which resulted in manifold 
increase in the pension payable to them. On 23.7.2001, 
i.e. 18 years after his retirement, Respondent No.1 
B submitted application for grant of permission to exercise 
of option in terms of circulars dated 29.12.1984 or 
19.2.1986. The application was rejected by appellant No.1 
on the ground that option to switch over to the Pension 
Scheme under Circular dated 29.12.1984 

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