SUSAN MATHEWS Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in both these cases are aggrieved by the withdrawal of the facility to opt for National Pension System (NPS) consequent to the issuance of Ext.P11 Government Order dated 17.03.2020. The petitioners in W.P(c) Nos.9864 of 2020 are Additional Doctors in Regional Cancer Centre (RCC) and petitioner in W.P.(C) No.10634 of 2020-D is an association of Doctors in RCC. The documents referred to in this judgment are as described in W.P(C).No.9864/2020.

(2.) The petitioners point out that a pension scheme was introduced in RCC, with the sanction of Government. Those who were in service between 26.02.2011 and 31.03.2013 were made eligible for pension on conditions stipulated therein. It is stated that after the Draft Pension Rules were issued by the RCC, Government had issued Ext.P4 order on 15.11.2015, providing the employees an opportunity to opt for NPS irrespective of their eligibility for pension under the Pension Scheme. Thereafter RCC Employees' Pension Rules, 2016 were framed incorporating the said provision in Rule 4 of Chapter 2. Petitioners submit that they had accordingly submitted their option to come under NPS, as they found it more feasible. The petitioners point out that despite direction in Ext P10 judgment in W.P(C).No.36516/2007 for implementation of all the provisions in the 2016 Pension Rules, the respondents are now withdrawing the rights conferred on them in those rules by issuing Ext P11 Government Order on 17.03.2020 for implementation of only one pension and withdrawing the provisions for pension under NPS. It is their complaint that their right to have the benefit of NPS is deprived of without even giving them an opportunity of hearing and by imposing REPS on the employees. According to the petitioners, the present scheme runs counter to the provisions contained in Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority Act , 2013 (PFRDA Act) and PFRDA Regulations thereof. Relying on the actuarial report dated 31.12.2016, the petitioners point out that the present scheme is not at all viable.

(3.) In the circumstances, I am of the view that it is only appropriate that the Government considers the grievance of the petitioners before Ext.P11 order issued by Government is implemented.