DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORTION Vs. KHEMCHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present appeal has impugned the judgment and decree dated 28.10.2006 which had endorsed the findings of the trial Judge dated 24.12.2004 whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff Khem Chand seeking a declaration (to the effect that he is not a pension optee of the defendant department; his gratuity could not be denied; employer s share of contribution of the provident fund and interest accruing thereon be disbursed to him) had been decreed in his favour.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff was that he was an ex-driver of the Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC). He was appointed in the year 1981. He was governed by the Contributory Provident Fund (CPF) Scheme. He was removed from service on 03.01.1997. At the time of his removal, he was entitled to gratuity and provident fund; the employer s contribution of the provident fund was not paid. On 15.04.1999 (Ex. PW-1/1), he received a letter from the department whereby the department conveyed to him that his contribution towards the CPF is being released to him; there was a remark in the letter that he was a pension optee which was incorrect and misleading. Vide letter dated 18.05.1999, he was advised to collect his share of the CPF in terms of Ex. PW-1/1 i.e. an amount of Rs.36,944/-. The employer s contribution of the provident fund and interest has been denied to him. The plaintiff was also entitled to gratuity. Since inspite of demands and legal notice the amounts were not paid, the present suit was filed.

(3.) In defence, the defendant denied the contentions raised by the plaintiff. It was stated that the plaintiff was initially covered under the CPF scheme. After his removal on 03.01.1997, his own CPF share was released to him. No dues are pending qua the plaintiff. There was no provision for payment of gratuity to employees who had been removed; the plaintiff was accordingly not entitled to gratuity as per pension rules. It was submitted that the pension scheme had come into force in 1992; in terms of the circular dated 27.11.1992 if any employee of the DTC did not exercise his option within a prescribed period of 30 days, there was a deeming provision that he would have deemed to have opted for the pension scheme; accordingly the plaintiff was treated as a pension optee. He was no longer under the CPF scheme.