HARISH CHANDRA CHAUDHARY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals arise out of a judgment of learned Single Judge, dtd. 18/3/2025, whereby learned Single Judge has refused to extend the benefit to the writ petitioners of the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in University of Delhi Vs. Smt. Shashi Kiran and others, 2022 (7) SCR 957. Learned Single Judge has held that the judgment in the case of Smt. Shashi Kiran (supra) is though a judgment in rem, yet its benefit cannot be extended to petitioners in the facts of the present case.

(2.) Petitioners in this batch of writ petitions are the teaching and non-teaching staff of Banaras Hindu University (hereinafter referred to as the 'BHU'). Some of them have also retired. Except petitioner Akhoury Sudhir Kumar Sinha, all other petitioners were in employment of the BHU prior to 1/1/1986. All of them were governed by the Central University Retirement Benefit Rules, 1967. As per these rules, they were entitled to benefit of Contributory Provident Fund Scheme (hereinafter referred to as 'CPF Scheme'). They were not covered by the Pension Scheme.

(3.) Central government employees were also covered by the CPF Scheme. They were given an option to switch over to Pension Scheme. This option was not exercised by all employees and some of them continued under the CPF Scheme. Recommendations of Fourth Pay Commission was implemented w.e.f. from 1/1/1986 for the Central Government employees. One of the recommendation of commission was that all CPF beneficiaries in service on 1/1/1986 be deemed to have come over to the pension scheme on that date, unless they specifically opt out to continue under the CPF scheme. This decision was implemented vide office memorandum dtd. 1/5/1987 which is reproduced hereinafter: