Himachal Pradesh High Court
_____________________________________________________________________ vs Cskhpkv And Anr on 31 July, 2025
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.201 of 2024
.
Date of Decision: 31.7.2025
_____________________________________________________________________
Neena Sharma
.........Petitioner
Versus
CSKHPKV and Anr.
.......Respondents
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?
For the Petitioner: Mr. Mukesh Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Prince Chauhan, Advocate.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)
By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following main reliefs:
"a) That the present petition may kindly be allowed and the petitioner's husband may very kindly be held entitled to be governed by the GPF Cum Pension scheme as framed filed annexure P1 and P2 with all consequential benefits from the due date as the present petitioner is similarly situated to the petitioner in CWP No. 66113/2020 titled as Suresh Chander Negi and others vs Chaudary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishwavidyalaya Palampur etc. (Annexure -P-9) and is entitled for the same relief.
b) That the petitioner's husband may very kindly be allowed to switch over from 'CPF-cum-Gratuity Scheme' to GPF-cum-pension-Cum-
Gratuity Scheme' and respondents may very kindly be directed to ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2025 21:16:33 :::CIS 2 allot them the GPF account number on the analogy of Dr Kamal Dev Sharma under the real spirit of the decision of the board of 2003 .
management notified by notification dated 25.7.2002, the necessary procedure for switching over, as has been done in the year 2012, may kindly be ordered to be adopted in the case of the petitioner's husband within a time bound period, in view of the judgment passed by the honourable High Court in the case of similarly situated to the petitioner's husband in CWPOA no. 6113/2020 titled as Suresh Chander Negi and others decided on 02.09.2022(annexure P9), in the interest of law and justice."
2. Learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem that issue sought to be decided in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated by this Court bunch of petitions, lead case whereof is CWPOA No. 6113 of 2020, titled Dr. Suresh Chander Negi and Ors. v. Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya (alongwith connected matters), which has been further upheld by Hon'ble Division Bench in LPA No. 46 of 2023 titled as Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya Palampur and Anr. v. Vipan Kumar Gupta and as such, case at hand can be disposed of making direction passed in afore case mutatis mutandis applicable in the case at hand also.
3. Having carefully perused averments contained in the petition, especially relief clause vis-à-vis judgment sought to be relied upon, this Court is fully convinced that issue sought to be decided in the instant proceedings stands already adjudicated in the afore case and as such, no ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2025 21:16:33 :::CIS 3 prejudice, shall would be caused to either of the parties in case similar .
directions are issued in case of the petitioner.
4. Though at this stage, Mr. Prince Chauhan, learned counsel for the respondents, while making available copy of judgment dated 6.5.2024 passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 3593 of 2025, titled Kamla Devi v. Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya Palampur and Anr., attempted to argue that petitioner herein being widow of employee of the respondent-University cannot be permitted to make prayer for switching over from CPF-cum-Gratuity Scheme to GPF-cum-Pension-cum Gratuity Scheme, but having perused aforesaid order passed by this court in entirety vis-à-vis findings returned by this Court in para-28 of the judgment sought to be relied upon, is not persuaded to agree with learned counsel for the respondents.
5. Though this court does not see any reason to differ with finding returned by the coordinate Bench of this Court in Kamla Devi (supra) because admittedly, in that case, late Sh. Dhani Ram, who was an employee of respondent-University, died in the year 2022, but he had superannuated in the year 2006, from the post of Beldar. During his life time, he never raised the issue of switching over from CPF-cum-Gratuity Scheme to GPF-cum-Pension-cum Gratuity Scheme. After his death, his wife was otherwise in receipt of family pension, filed petition raising therein ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2025 21:16:33 :::CIS 4 issue with regard to switching over from CPF-cum-Gratuity Scheme to GPF-
.
cum-Pension-cum Gratuity Scheme.
6. Coordinate Bench of this Court held that issue of switching from one pension scheme to other pension scheme was a matter personal to late husband of the petitioner and his wife cannot be permitted to enter into his footsteps for praying this kind of relief. However, in this case, claim of the petitioner as has been put forth is that her late husband had not exercised option with regard to switching from one pension scheme to other pension scheme, but in terms of notification dated 25.7.2002, whereby employees of the university were called to exercise fresh option and the subsequent notification, it specifically came to be recorded that other terms and conditions of pension granted in the year 1997 shall remain the same, the left out category, which includes the husband of the petitioner, in the event of non-exercise of option, was to be covered under GPF-cum-Pension Scheme, 1997. Since there is no dispute inter-se parties that late husband of the petitioner had not exercised option of switching over from one pension scheme to other pension scheme, he, in terms of notification dated 25.7.2002 as well as subsequent notification thereto (Annexure P-3) was automatically to be covered under GPF-cum-Gratuity Scheme 1997 on account of his non-exercise of option. If it is so, there is otherwise no requirement, if any, for the petitioner being widow of late Sh. Janme Jai ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2025 21:16:33 :::CIS 5 Sharma, an employee of the university, to apply for switching from one .
scheme to other scheme. For more clarity with regard to afore aspect of the matter, parties may specifically refer to the paragraph-28 of the judgment passed in Dr. Suresh Chander Negi (supra).
7. Consequently, in view of the facts noted herein above coupled with the fact that issue sought to be decided already stands adjudicated in the afore judgment, present petition is disposed while making aforesaid judgment mutatis mutandis applicable in the present case for all intents and purposes. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of accordingly.
July 31, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma),
(manjit) Judge
::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2025 21:16:33 :::CIS