UOI Vs. AMIT MUKHERJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the outset we note that only 26 persons, most of whom are Group-C and Group-D employees, working under Delhi Urban Art Commission would be affected by any decision which we take in the instant writ petition. Said 26 persons have been impleaded as respondents No.1 to 26 in the writ petition.

(2.) THE 26 respondents are employees of Delhi Urban Arts Commission (DUAC) and the grievance which they raised before the Tribunal was that whereas the Central Government accorded approval to the decision taken by the managements of as many as 12 bodies/subordinate offices under the Central Government to switch over from the CPF scheme to the pension scheme, for no valid reasons, similar request was declined when the management of DUAC, after taking approval from the employees to effect switch over, sent the same for approval to the Central Government.

(3.) IT is not in dispute that on May 01, 1987, the Department of Pension and Pensioners Welfare issued a directive to all ministries, inter alia, directing : 'Administrative Ministries administering any of the Contributory Provident Fund Rules, other than Contributory Provident Fund Rules (India) 1962 are also advised to issue similar orders in respect of CPF beneficiaries covered by those Rules in consultation with the Department of Pension and Pensioners Welfare.'