UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, NATIONAL COUNCIL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH & TRAINING. versus SHYAM BABU MAHESHWARI

Citation: [2011] 7 S.C.R. 548 · Decided: 09-05-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.V. RAVEENDRAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2011] 7 S.C.R. 548 
A 
UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, 
NATIONAL COUNCIL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH & 
TRAINING. 
v. 
SHYAM BABU MAHESHWARI 
B 
{Civil Appeal No. 4202 of 2011) 
MAY 09, 2011 
[R.V. RAVEENDRAN AND A.K. PATNAIK, JJ.) 
C 
Service Law: 
Service benefits -
Switchover from CPF scheme to 
pension scheme - Permissibility of - Respondent-employee 
while he was in service of NCERT had opted for the CPF 
0 Scheme way back in 1977 and on his retirement, had availed 
the benefits of the CPF Scheme - Claim of respondent to 
switch over from CPF scheme to Pension Scheme - Allowed 
by Tribunal, the Single Judge and th~ Division Bench of the 
High Court - Justification of - Held: Not justified - Once an 
employee has opted for the CPF Scheme, his exercise of 
E option is final and he is not entitled to change over to the 
Pension Scheme because the two schemes are entirely 
different - However, Ministry of Personnel and Training by 
0. M. dated 06. 06. 1985 gave an opportunity to Central 
Government employees who had earlier opted for the CPF 
F Scheme to opt for the Pension Scheme - The 0. M. dated 
06.06.1985 was adopted by the NCERT in its Circular dated 
18. 07. 1985 - It is clear from the language of 0. M. dated 
06.06.1985 that the option to an employee to switch over from 
the CPF Scheme to the Pension Scheme was open to only 
G those employees who were in service on 31.03.1985 and who 
were retiring on or after 31.03.1985 - By 31.03.1985, the 
respondent had retired, his date of retirement being 
31.07.1984 - He was, therefore, not entitled to fresh option to 
· switch over from the CPF Scheme to the Pension Scheme -
H 
M8 
UNION OF INDIA THR. SEC., NATIONAL COUNCIL OF EDU. 549 
RES. & TRAIN. v. SHYAM BABU MAHESHWARI 
Contributory Provident Fund Rules, 1962 - Rule 38 - Central A 
Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972. 
The respondent was in the service of the National 
Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). 
The employees of the NCERT were given an option to 
8 
choose either the CPF Scheme or the General Provident 
Fund-cum-Pension Scheme. In 1977, the respondent 
opted for the CPF Scheme. On 31.07.1984, the respondent 
retired from service and withdrew his benefits under the 
CPF Scheme. On 06.06.1985, the Ministry of Personnel 
and Training Administrative Reforms & Public Grievances 
C 
and Pension (Department of Personnel and Training) 
issued O.M. No.F.3(1)-Pension Unitl85 intimating the 
decision of the Government that Central Government 
employees who had retained the Contributory Provident 
Fund benefits in terms of Rule 38 of the Contributory D 
Provident Fund Rules, 1962 or in terms of any other 
orders issued in that behalf, may be allowed another 
opportunitY to opt for the Pension Scheme as laid down 
in the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972. In the 
O.M. dated 06.06.1985, it was made clear that the option 
E 
was open to those employees who were in service on 
31.03.1985 and were retiring from service on or after that 
date. 
NCERT issued a circular dated 18.07 .1985 intimating 
F 
all concerned that employees of NCERT, who had earlier 
opted for the CPF Scheme, may exercise their option 
before 06.12.1985 to switch over to the Pension Scheme 
and such option once exercised will be treated as final. 
Before his retirement, the Respondent claims to have 
G 
applied on 27.02.1984 to change over from the CPF 
Scheme to the Pension Scheme. The said request for 
change over from the CPF Scheme to the Pension 
Scheme was rejected on 23/26.06.1989. 
H 
550 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011] 7 S.C.R. 
A 
The respondent filed an application before the 
Rajasthan Non-Government Education Tribunal in the 
year 1995, seeking permission to opt for the Pension 
Scheme. The Tribunal relying on the decision of this 
Court in R. Subramaniam directed the appellant to declare 
B the respondent as entitled to the benefits of the Pension . 
Scheme with effect from the date of his retirement and fix ' 
his pension accordingly. The appellant challenged the 
order of the Tribunal before the High Court in Civil Writ 
Petition which was dismissed by a Single Judge of the 
c High Court. The appellant then filed Civil Special Appeal 
(Writ) which was also dismissed by the Division Bench 
of the High Court. 
In the instant appeal, the appellant submitted that a 
Constitution Bench of this Court in Krishena Kumar has 
D clearly held that employees who opt for the CPF Scheme 
and employees who opt for
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.