Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2015 (1) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (1) TMI 1502 - SC - Indian LawsChange-over of CPF to Pension Scheme - Request of the Appellants to switch-over to the Pension Scheme pursuant to the O.M. dated 1.5.1987, had been turned down - applicability of the O.M. dated 01.05.1987 to the employees of NWDA - whether reliance placed by the Tribunal upon the decision in S.L. Verma's case [2006 (11) TMI 722 - SUPREME COURT] was correct? HELD THAT:- Based on the provisions in O.M. proposal for framing of DCRG Rules for employees of NWDA was processed by the officers on deputation from pensionable departments with help from officers/employees. The officer and employees were fully involved and they cannot claim that they were totally ignorant of the orders. The changeover of employees cannot be suo-motto made applicable for NWDA employees. The Petitioners have failed to prove arbitrary action of the Respondents and hence SUDHIR CHANDRA SARKAR VERSUS TATA IRON & STEEL [1984 (3) TMI 418 - SUPREME COURT], and ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, BIHAR AND ANOTHER VERSUS N. BAKSHI [1961 (11) TMI 69 - SUPREME COURT], has no application. It can be concluded that NWDA had framed its Regulation the CPF Rules, 1982 and they were duly approved by the Governing Body of NWDA. As NWDA is an autonomous body under the Ministry of Water Resources, it has framed it own bye-laws governing the employees. It has been time and again reiterated that the Court must adopt an attitude of total non-interference or minimal interference in the matter of interpretation of Rules framed by autonomous institutions. Parity between the employees of NWDA and Central Government employees - HELD THAT:- NWDA cannot be treated as an instrumentality of the State Under Article 12 of the Constitution merely on the basis that its funds are granted by the Central Government. In ZEE TELEFILMS LTD & ANR VERSUS UOI. & ORS [2005 (2) TMI 773 - SUPREME COURT], it was held by this Court that the autonomous bodies having some nexus with the Government by itself would not bring them within the sweep of the expression 'State' and each case must be determined on its own merits. Thus, the plea of the employees of NWDA to be treated at par with their counterparts in Central Government Under Sub-rule (6)(iv) of Rule 2009 of General Financial Rules, merely on the basis of funding is not applicable. Even if it is presumed that NWDA is "State" Under Article 12 of the Constitution, the Appellants have failed to prove that they are at par with their counterparts, with whom they claim parity. As held by this Court in UNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH VERSUS KRISHAN BHANDARI [1996 (10) TMI 528 - SUPREME COURT], the claim to equality can be claimed when there is discrimination by the State between two persons who are similarly situated. The said discrimination cannot be invoked in cases where discrimination sought to be shown is between acts of two different authorities functioning as State Under Article 12. Thus, the employees of NWDA cannot be said to be 'Central Government Employees' as stated in the O.M. for its applicability. Thus, by reason that the employees are governed by NWDA CPF Rules, 1982, the O.M. dated 01.05.1987 is not applicable to the Appellant-employees. Further, as they have not established that they are Central Government employees, at par with their counterparts, their claim of parity with Central Government Employees is also defeated. There are no merit in these appeals which are accordingly dismissed. Seeking direction/s to the Respondents to introduce and implement CCS Pension Scheme, 1972 to all the employees of the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti - HELD THAT:- The cut-off date is a domain of the employer and so the introduction of new scheme of pension will be done considering all the relevant factors including financial viability of the same. No interference is warranted unless there is gross injustice is perpetrated. The Appellants have failed to prove any arbitrariness and discrimination with respect to the New Pension Scheme. The writ petitions and the appeal are also dismissed.
|