Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Dr. Arvind Vishnu Patankar, a Ph.D. in Solid State Physics, joined Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR) as a Research Assistant in 1955. In 1976, TIFR assigned him to set up the Western Regional Instrumentation Centre (WRIC) in Mumbai, where he worked as Professor and Director from 31st March 1979 until his retirement on 31st July 1992. In 1985-86, the University of Mumbai adopted a Pension Scheme for its employees. The petitioner could not avail benefits under the initial scheme due to his transfer to WRIC. Prior to his retirement, he wrote to the University Grants Commission (UGC) inquiring about pension benefits. After retirement, his pension was denied. He filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to quash the orders denying pension and to direct the respondents—UGC, State of Maharashtra, University of Mumbai, and WRIC—to pay pension from 1st July 1992. The court considered the facts and held that the petitioner was entitled to pension under the University Pension Scheme. The court reasoned that WRIC was a constituent unit of the University, and the University had adopted the pension scheme. The court directed the University of Mumbai and the UGC to pay the pension to the petitioner from the date of his superannuation, with arrears, and to recover the employees' contribution fund paid at the time of superannuation from the arrears. The petition was allowed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Pension - Entitlement - University Pension Scheme - The petitioner, a retired professor and director of WRIC, sought pension benefits under the University Pension Scheme adopted by the University of Mumbai. The court held that the petitioner was entitled to pension as he was an employee of WRIC, which was a constituent unit of the University, and the University had adopted the pension scheme. The court directed the University and UGC to pay pension from the date of superannuation. (Paras 1-9) B) Service Law - Pension - Liability - University Grants Commission - The court held that the University Grants Commission, being the funding body, was also liable to ensure payment of pension to the petitioner. The court directed the UGC to release funds to the University for payment of pension. (Paras 1-9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner is entitled to pension benefits under the University Pension Scheme for his service at WRIC, and which respondent is liable to pay the pension.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The respondents, particularly the University of Mumbai and the University Grants Commission, are directed to pay pension to the petitioner from 1st July 1992 and to recover the employees' contribution fund paid at the time of superannuation from the arrears.
Law Points
- Pension is a right
- not a bounty
- and must be granted to employees who have rendered service
- even if the employer is a unit of a larger institution that has adopted a pension scheme
- University Pension Scheme applies to employees of constituent units
- Writ of mandamus can be issued to enforce pension rights
