UNION OF INDIA &ANR Vs. PANKAJ KUMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner No.1/Ministry of Defence and the petitioner No.2/Directorate General of Naval Armament are aggrieved by the order dated 16.8.2016 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, allowing O.A. 1624/2016 filed by the respondent No.1 wherein he had prayed for extension of the benefit of the Old Pension Scheme (hereinafter referred to as "the OPS") governed under the CCS Pension Rules, 1972.

(2.) The admitted facts of the case are that the respondent No.2/UPSC had held the Engineering Service Examination, 2001 wherein the respondent No.1 had applied and participated as a candidate. In May, 2002 the respondent No.2/UPSC had declared the final results and the name of the respondent No.1 was included in the list of selected candidates. Based on the results of the aforesaid examination, a total of five candidates including the respondent No.1, were nominated by the Ministry of Railways for appointment in the Indian Naval Armament Services (in short "the INAS"). Out of the five candidates nominated by the Railway Board, three were issued letters of appointment on 09.8.2002 and they all joined service in October, 2003 whereas, the respondent No.1 and another successful candidate were issued the appointment letters only on 17.3.2004. After seeking extension of time, the respondent No.1 herein finally joined the service on 30.7.2004.

(3.) The grievance of the respondent No.1 as raised before the Tribunal is that the petitioners had acted in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner by denying him the benefits of the OPS governed by the CCS Pension Rules, 1972 and instead, had covered him under the New Contributory Pension Scheme (hereinafter referred to as "the NPS") that was introduced by the government and made effective from 01.01.2004.