LAWS(ALL)-2002-10-202

RAM SHANKAR SINHA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On October 09, 2002
Ram Shankar Sinha Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was an employee of the Indian Railways and after completion of 20 years of service, he sought voluntary retirement on 3171976. A pension scheme was introduced for the employees of the Indian Railways on 16111957 w.e.f. 141957. Prior to this the employees were governed by the State Railways Provident Fund Rules (hereinafter referred to as the SRPF Rules). On the introduction of the pension scheme all the Railway Employees were asked to give their option as to whether they would like to be governed by the pension scheme or by the existing SRPF Rules. Like many other employees, the petitioner had opted to be governed by the SRPF Rules and not the pension scheme.

(2.) AFTER seeking voluntary retirement in 1976, the petitioner agitated the matter and claimed to be entitled to the pensionary benefits under the pension scheme. More than 20 years after his retirement, he filed an application under Section 19 of the Central Administrative Tribunal Act for grant of pensionary benefits. The Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad registered the case as O.A. No. 772 of 1997. After exchange of the pleadings and hearing the parties, the Tribunal held that since despite several opportunities having been given to him till the time of his retirement, the petitioner had not opted for the pension scheme introduced by the Railways, he could not now be given the benefit of the scheme. The Tribunal also considered the prayer of the petitioner for grant of exgratia payment under a scheme that had been introduced by the Railways and held that since the said scheme was for the families of the 'deceased retirees' who had opted to be governed by the SRPF Rules, the petitioner, who was claiming for himself, could not get the benefit of the same.

(3.) WE have heard Sri P.K. Srivastava learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Govind Saran learned Counsel appearing for the contesting respondents (Railways). Since counter and rejoinderaffidavits have been exchanged, with the consent of parties, we are disposing of the writ petition finally.