RAGHBIR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition the petitioners have challenged the action of the respondents in refusing to them the benefits of the Punjab Privately Managed Recognised Aided Schools Retirement Benefit Scheme, 1992 with the further prayer that a mandamus be issued directing the respondents to adopt and to implement the said scheme to the employees of the privately managed recognised aided schools of UT Chandigarh.

(2.) The main plank of the argument is that vide notification dated 13.1.92 ( Annexuere-P4) it was laid down that the conditions of the services of persons appointed to the Central Civil Service and posts in group A, B, C and D under the administrative control of the Administrator, UT Chandigarh shall be the same as the conditions of services appointed to corresponding posts in Punjab Civil Services and shall be governed by the same rules and orders as are for the time being applicable to the later category of persons. The stand of the petitioners is that since they were working against aided posts they would for all intents and purposes be covered by the said notification. They have also relied upon some letters written by the UT, Chandigarh?respondent No.2 to the effect that they were themselves considering the implementation of the Punjab Pension Scheme. The Union of India-respondent No.1 in its written statement mentioned that the matter was referred to the Ministry of Finance which rejected the proposal on the ground that as a matter of the policy it had not agreed to any proposal for induction of pension scheme for employees of autonomous bodies and that they had been advising autonomous bodies to work out suitable annuity scheme through the Life Insurance Corporation or alternatively such employees could join the pension scheme introduced by the Ministry of Labour for the provident fund subscribers.

(3.) In our opinion by definition the notification dated 13.1.92 (Annexure P-4) cannot be held applicable to the petitioners since they cannot be equated with civil servants. Apart from that the issues are purely policy issues and the policy of the Government of India enumerated above cannot be termed to be either palpably perverse or even arguably arbitrary. In the circumstances this writ petition is dismissed.