Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Suhas Vinayak Sohoni, was appointed as a Development Officer in the National Insurance Co. Ltd. on 10 February 1985. After completing 17 years, 1 month, and 18 days of service, he gave notice for voluntary retirement on 14 February 2003 to take advantage of the Special Voluntary Retirement Package introduced on 1 February 2003. Although his voluntary retirement was accepted, the respondents denied him gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and pension under the General Insurance (Employees') Pension Scheme, 1995 on the ground that he had not completed 20 years of qualifying service as required by Clause 30 under Chapter V of the Pension Scheme. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking pension and gratuity. During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel, Shri V.S. Bapat, relied on the Supreme Court's decision in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Kirpal Singh, delivered on 10 January 2014, which held that employees who have completed continuous service of 10 years are entitled to pension under Clause 14 of Chapter IV of the Pension Scheme, and Clause 30 is not applicable. The counsel did not press the relief for gratuity. The respondents were initially unrepresented on the first day of hearing, but on the next day, counsel Shri G.N. Khanzode appeared. The court, after hearing both sides, found that the petitioner's case was squarely covered by the Kirpal Singh decision. The court held that the petitioner, having completed more than 10 years of service, was entitled to pension under Clause 14. The court allowed the petition, directing the respondents to grant pension to the petitioner from the date of his retirement, i.e., 14 February 2003, with arrears and interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of retirement until actual payment. The respondents were also directed to pay the arrears within three months.
Headnote
A) Pension Law - Voluntary Retirement - Qualifying Service - General Insurance (Employees') Pension Scheme, 1995, Clauses 14 and 30 - Petitioner completed 17 years of service and opted for voluntary retirement under Special Voluntary Retirement Package - Respondents denied pension citing Clause 30 requiring 20 years of qualifying service - Court held that the Supreme Court in Kirpal Singh established that employees with 10 years of continuous service are entitled to pension under Clause 14, and Clause 30 is not applicable - Petition allowed, respondents directed to grant pension from date of retirement with arrears and interest (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether an employee who voluntarily retired after completing 17 years of service is entitled to pension under the General Insurance (Employees') Pension Scheme, 1995, despite not completing 20 years of qualifying service as per Clause 30, in light of the Supreme Court's decision in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Kirpal Singh.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to grant pension to the petitioner from the date of his retirement, i.e., 14-2-2003, with arrears and interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of retirement till actual payment. The arrears be paid within three months.
Law Points
- Pension eligibility
- Voluntary retirement
- Qualifying service
- General Insurance (Employees') Pension Scheme 1995
- Clause 30 vs Clause 14
- Supreme Court precedent
