Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11548 of 2021 Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Pandey Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Abhishek Srivastava
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Petitioner was initially appointed in U.P. State Electricity Board on 11.8.1994. The U.P. State Electricity Board was trifurcated on 9.1.2000. Petitioner's services were accordingly absorbed in one of the three trifurcated corporations i.e. U.P. Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd. He continued to work as such. Petitioner later applied and was directly recruited as Assistant Engineer in the same corporation on 10.1.2001. Benefit of pension scheme, applicable earlier, however, has not been extended to petitioner since a new pension scheme got enforced w.e.f. 14.1.2000. According to respondents since petitioner's appointment on the post of Assistant Engineer was a fresh appointment, therefore benefit of previous services would neither be counted nor the pension scheme, which was earlier available, would be applicable. The denial of benefit of old pension scheme is thus assailed in the present writ petition by relying upon a Government Order dated 25.11.2011, which protects the benefit of previous pension scheme, where the employee is relieved or submits technical resignation in the same department/organization.
Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner states that various Government Orders have been issued protecting previous pension scheme in a case where employment is offered in different State organization(s). Reliance is placed upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Special Appeal Defective No.297 of 2021 (State of U.P. and others Vs. Vaibhav Singh), decided on 13.7.2021, in which a similar Government Order has been relied upon to grant protection of previous pension scheme. Reliance is also placed upon a judgment of this Court in Suman Pal Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2017 (2) UPLBEC 1080.
Petition is opposed by Sri Abhishek Srivastava for the respondents, who submits that the aforesaid Government Orders will have no applicability in the facts of the present case. It is also stated that such claim of the petitioner was not accepted way back in the year 2010.
From the materials brought on record it does not appear that there is any conscious application of mind on part of the respondents to the petitioner's claim for grant of old pension scheme with reference to applicable Government Order. Since the Government order dated 25.11.2011 intends to protect the right of persons such as petitioner and is a piece of beneficial policy, it would be appropriate to require the respondents to examine petitioner's claim for the benefit of previous pension scheme, by passing an appropriate reasoned order, in accordance with law. In the event the aforesaid Government Order is superseded by any subsequent Government Order, the same shall also be taken note of for passing appropriate orders.
Writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed of with a direction upon respondent no.3 to accord consideration to petitioner's claim, in accordance with law. Petitioner is at liberty to make a fresh comprehensive representation annexing all relevant materials in support of his claim, within a period of four weeks from today. The required consideration would be made by the Managing Director within a further period of three months, thereafter.
Order Date :- 23.9.2021 Anil