IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
SRI JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.
AND
SRI JUSTICE R.C. KHULBE, J.
21ST JULY, 2022 WRIT-PETITION (S/B) No.43 OF 2022 Between:
Dr. Aditya Narayan Pandey and Others .......Petitioners and State of Uttarakhand and Others ....Respondents Counsel for the petitioners : Ms. Shaifali Singh, learned counsel. Counsel for the State : Mr. K.N. Joshi, learned Deputy Advocate General.
Counsel for respondent no.3 : Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. N.S. Pundir, learned counsel. JUDGMENT : (per Sri Vipin Sanghi, C.J.) The petitioners have preferred this petition to seek a direction to the respondents to give them the benefit of Old Pension Scheme along with all other applicable benefits. The petitioners submitted their applications in response to the advertisement issued on 16.03.2005 by the Secretary, Uttarakhand Public Service Commission for the post of Professors, Lecturers and Readers.
2. The petitioners state that the selection process was initiated vide a notification dated 19.10.2007 and they were offered appointment on different dates between 17.07.2008 and 22.01.2009. The petitioners further state that on 25.10.2005 the Government of Uttarakhand introduced 'defined contribution pension scheme' i.e. New Pension Scheme. This was contributory pension scheme made applicable from 01.10.2005.
3. The petitioners, at the relevant point of time, did not raise any grievance and continued to serve and only now, in the year 2022, the present petition has been preferred by them that they are entitled to be covered by the Old Pension Scheme which was prevalent before 01.10.2005. In support of their submission they seek to place reliance on an order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No.330 of 2013 and Special Appeal No.523 of 2013 on 26.06.2014. In that case, the petitioners applied for the post of Assistant Teacher in Government Primary Schools and were interviewed on 28.09.2005 and were selected vide order dated 29.09.2005. In that light, the Special Appeal was allowed by observing as follows:-
"Undisputedly, when petitioners applied for the post, old pension scheme was in existence, therefore, petitioners had every reasonable expectation that they would be governed by the service conditions prevailing on the date posts were advertised and recruitment process was commenced. In our considered view, service conditions, prevailing on the date recruitment process commenced, cannot be permitted to be altered in disadvantage of the recruitees. Moreover, in our considered opinion, Government Order dated 25.10.2005 is prospective in nature and cannot be made applicable retrospectively for the persons who had applied for the post prior to 25.10.2005. Therefore, we do not find any reason to take contrary view to the view taken by the learned Single Judge."
4. We may, firstly, observe that on facts the present case is clearly distinguishable from the case considered by the Division Bench while dealing with Special Appeal No.330 of 2013 and Special Appeal No.523 of 2013. As noticed above, the selection process in relation to the petitioners was initiated much after the discontinuation of the Old Pension Scheme on 30.09.2005. Even the appointments of the petitioners was made much later in the years 2008 and 2009. Even otherwise, it appears that the petitions are debarred by delay and latches.
5. We may also observe that we have strong reservation about the correctness of the principle invoked by the Court while dealing with Special Appeal No.330 of 2013 and Special Appeal No.523 of 2013. However, we have been informed that the said decision has been stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the special leave petition pending before it, and an interim order has been passed in favour of the State Government permitting the State to make the necessary deductions.
6. For this reason, we are refraining from referring the matter to a larger Bench of this Court at this stage.
7. For the aforesaid reasons, we find absolutely no merits in this petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.
R.C. KHULBE, J.
Dt: 21st July, 2022 BS/SS