STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. PERMESHWARI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents in the appeals who were writ petitioners were mostly Safai Karmacharies working under different Municipal Boards. Two of them were drivers. They come from the humblest strata of the society. They had joined services prior to the year 1989 and were governed by the Contributory Provident Fund Rules. In the year 1989 the Pension Rules of 1989 were promulgated and as per Rule 5 employees were given an option to opt for continuing under the Contributory Provident Fund Rules or for pension. As per Rule 5 of the Rules of 1989 the option could be exercised only once. The respondents exercised the option to continue to be Members of Contributory Provident Fund and later on realised that opting for pension would have been better. The appellants, relying upon Rule 5, did not permit the respondents to revise their options.

(2.) Writ petitions filed by the respondents were allowed by the learned Single Judge vide impugned order dated 22.09.2015 relying upon earlier decisions of a Single Judge in S.B.C.W.P No.9742/2007 and 9739/2007. The decision was dated 25.02.2009. The decisions in the said two writ petitions have not been produced before us today but learned counsel for the appellants states that the decisions have been implemented.

(3.) Whilst it may be correct that as per Rule 5 once the option is exercised it cannot be revised and on facts the respondents exercised option to continue to be governed by the Contributory Provident Fund Rules. Meaning thereby they opted to continue to be the members of the Contributory Provident Fund. But the question which arises is whether the respondents took an informed decision.