Bombay High Court
Indira Madhav Mehetre vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 16 September, 2022
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil, Sandeep V. Marne
1 WP 10534.19-1.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH
AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 10534 OF 2019
Smt. Indira Madhav Mehetre,
Age : 49 Years, Occu. : Household,
R/o Mehetre Nivas, Vikasnagar,
Degloor Road, Udgir, Tq. Udgir,
District Latur. .. Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through : Principle Secretary,
Higher Technical Education Deptt.,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.
2. The Joint Director,
Higher Technical Education Department,
Nanded Division,
Nanded.
3. The Principal,
Pansare Mahavidyalaya,
Arjapur, Tq. Biloli,
District Nanded.
4. The Accountant General,
Maharashtra,
Nagpur - II, Dist. Nagpur. .. Respondents
Shri Balaji B. Yenge, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Shri K. N. Lokhande, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4.
Shri Mrigesh D. Narwadkar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 3.
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL AND
SANDEEP V. MARNE, JJ.
CLOSED FOR JUDGMENT ON : 13.09.2022
JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON : 16.09.2022
::: Uploaded on - 16/09/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 17/09/2022 13:22:02 :::
2 WP 10534.19-1.odt
JUDGMENT (Per Sandeep V. Marne, J.) :-
. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of
parties taken up for final hearing.
2. Heard Mr. Yenge, learned advocate for the petitioner, Mr.
Lokhande, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent
Nos. 1, 2 and 4 and Mr. Narwadkar, learned advocate for the
respondent No. 3.
3. By the present petition, the petitioner seeks family pension
after death of her husband, who was working on the post of Principal
with the respondent No. 3 college. The only ground on which family
pension is rejected, is that her husband had opted for Contributory
Provident Fund Scheme (for short "C.P.F. Scheme") and that he was
not governed by the Pension Scheme.
4. We need not go into the merits of the issue as to whether the
petitioner's husband was entitled to switch over from C.P.F. scheme
to Pension Scheme in view of various correspondence that has taken
place in the matter. By letter dated 11 March 2022, the Joint
Director of Higher Education, Nanded Division, Nanded has
communicated to the management that upon deposit of employer's
contribution to the C.P.F. along with interest, the petitioner's
husband can be brought over on pension scheme. There is no dispute
that the employer's contribution to C.P.F. scheme has been computed
at Rs. 5,36,061/-. She is willing to deposit the same. The only
controversy is about the interest. While the respondent State
Government is insisting that the amount must be deposited with
::: Uploaded on - 16/09/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 17/09/2022 13:22:02 :::
3 WP 10534.19-1.odt
interest, Petitioner contends that she is also entitled to interest on
the arrears of family pension and, therefore, the interest on the
amount of Rs. 5,36,061/- is required to be set off against the interest
receivable by her on arrears of family pension.
5. Mr. Lokhande, the learned Assistant Government Pleader
appearing for respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4 has invited our attention to
the Government Resolution dated 23.06.2015, under which a scheme
is formulated for switching over from C.P.F. Scheme to Pension
Scheme after deposit of employer's contribution to C.P.F. along with
interest. He would submit that since the Government Resolution
makes it mandatory to deposit interest on employer's contribution,
no departure can be made in the case of the petitioner. We are in
agreement with the submission of Mr. Lokhande. Since swich over
from CPF scheme to Pension scheme is contingent upon deposit of
employer's contribution along with interest, in accordance with the
provisions of the G. R. dated 23.06.2015, the petitioner will have to
deposit even the amount of interest on employer's contribution.
6. By letter dated 08 September 2022, the Joint Director of
Higher Education, Nanded has computed and communicated the
amount of employer's contribution to C.P.F. as well as interest
payable thereon. The employer's contribution is Rs. 5,36,061/- and
interest thereon is Rs. 1,97,104/-. Thus the total amount payable by
the petitioner is Rs. 7,35,165/-. We are of the view that the
petitioner will have to pay such amount of Rs. 7,35,165/- for coming
over to the pension scheme.
7. There is no dispute that upon payment of such amount of Rs.
::: Uploaded on - 16/09/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 17/09/2022 13:22:02 :::
4 WP 10534.19-1.odt
7,35,165/-, the petitioner's husband would come over to the pension
scheme and upon his death on 01.06.2014, the petitioner would
become entitled to family pension. The respondents would be
required to pay monthly family pension to the petitioner from
01.06.2014 onwards. It appears that the amount of arrears of family
pension from 01.06.2014 onwards would be much higher than the
amount of Rs. 7,35,165/- payable by the petitioner towards refund of
employer's contribution to C.P.F. along with interest. In these
circumstances, instead of directing the petitioner to pay the amount
of Rs. 7,35,165/- as a precondition for sanction of family pension, we
deem it appropriate to direct that said amount of Rs. 7,35,165/- be
adjusted and recovered from the amount of arrears of family pension
payable to the petitioner. In the circumstances we proceed to pass
following order.
ORDER
(I) The writ petition is allowed by holding that the petitioner's
husband is deemed to have come over on to the pension
scheme and he would not be governed by the C.P.F.
Scheme. Consequentially the petitioner is entitled to
receive family pension from the date of death of her
husband i. e. with effect from 01.06.2014. She would also be
entitled to receive all other retiral benefits payable as per
Rules.
(II) For such switch over from C.P.F. scheme to Pension
scheme, the petitioner is liable to pay an amount of Rs.
7,35,165/- towards employer's contribution to C.P.F.
including the component of interest.
5 WP 10534.19-1.odt
(III) The amount of Rs. 7,35,165/- be adjusted against the
amount towards arrears of family pension payable to the
petitioner. Therefore, the respondents shall not insist on
actual deposit of amount of Rs. 7,35,165/- and after
calculating amount of arrears of family pension and other
pensionary benefits, such amount of Rs. 7,35,165/- be
adjusted therefrom.
(IV) After deducting the amount of Rs. 7,35,165/- from such
arrears, the balance amount of family pension and other
pensionary benefits be paid to the petitioner within a period
of four (04) months from today.
(V) Rule is made absolute in above terms. No costs.
[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.] [MANGESH S. PATIL, J.]
bsb/Sept. 22
