Case Note & Summary
The appellant was appointed as Junior Scientist cum Assistant Professor by the respondent-University in 1987. At the time of his appointment, the University was governed by the Rajendra Agricultural University Statutes, 1976. Chapter 16 of the University Statute provided for two retiral benefit schemes: (i) Contributory Provident Fund (CPF), which required an express option from the employee and disentitled the employee from pension and General Provident Fund; and (ii) General Provident Fund (GPF)-cum-pension-cum-gratuity, which was the default scheme for employees who did not opt for CPF. The University issued an Office Order on 21.02.2008 giving employees an opportunity to opt for CPF, with a clear stipulation in Clause IV that those who did not give their option would be included in the Pension Scheme. The appellant did not submit his option for CPF within the stipulated time. However, when the University published a list of employees in the pension scheme on 12.04.2008, the appellant's name was not included. After several representations, the appellant filed a writ petition before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking inclusion in the GPF-cum-pension-cum-gratuity scheme. The learned single judge dismissed the writ petition on 27.02.2019, reasoning that the appellant did not opt for these retiral benefits despite being given options in 1990, 1995, 1996, and 2008. The appellant's writ appeal was dismissed on 24.11.2022 on similar grounds. The Supreme Court, after hearing the parties, held that the clear provisions of the University Statute and the Office Order mandated that the default scheme applies when an employee does not opt for CPF. The High Court erred in dismissing the petition on the ground that the appellant did not exercise his option, as the Statute and Office Order made it clear that non-option results in inclusion in the pension scheme. The Supreme Court set aside the impugned order and directed the University to include the appellant in the GPF-cum-pension-cum-gratuity scheme and grant him consequential benefits within three months.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Retiral Benefits - Default Scheme - University Statute Chapter 16.1(b)(i) and (e) - The appellant, appointed in 1987, did not opt for Contributory Provident Fund despite opportunities in 1990, 1995, 1996, and 2008. The Supreme Court held that under the clear provisions of the University Statute and Office Order, the default scheme of General Provident Fund-cum-pension-cum-gratuity applies when an employee does not opt for Contributory Provident Fund. The High Court erred in dismissing the writ petition on the ground that the appellant did not exercise his option. (Paras 9-11) B) Service Law - Interpretation of Statutes - University Statute Chapter 16.1(b)(i) - The provision states that employees 'will be entitled to pension provided they do not opt for subscribing to the Contributory Provident Fund'. The Supreme Court interpreted this to mean that pension is the default entitlement, and only those who specifically opt for Contributory Provident Fund are excluded. The burden is on the University to prove that the employee opted out of the default scheme. (Paras 9-10) C) Service Law - Office Order - Clause IV - The Office Order dated 21.02.2008 explicitly provides that employees who do not give their option for Contributory Provident Fund shall be included in the Pension Scheme. The Supreme Court held that this clause is binding and the University failed to comply with its own order. (Paras 5-6, 11)
Issue of Consideration
Whether an employee who did not opt for the Contributory Provident Fund scheme is entitled to be included in the General Provident Fund-cum-pension-cum-gratuity scheme by default under the University Statute and Office Order.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order of the High Court dated 24.11.2022, and directed the respondent-University to include the appellant in the General Provident Fund-cum-pension-cum-gratuity scheme and grant him consequential benefits within three months.
Law Points
- Default retiral scheme applies when employee does not opt for alternative scheme
- University Statute Chapter 16.1(b)(i) and (e)
- Office Order Clause IV
