Bombay High Court
Shashikant S.Chunekar And Ors vs Union Of India Through The ... on 21 November, 2025
Author: Ravindra V. Ghuge
Bench: Ravindra V. Ghuge
2025:BHC-AS:50481-DB
Digitally signed
by ARUNA
ARUNA SANDEEP
SANDEEP TALWALKAR
TALWALKAR Date:
2025.11.21
18:51:34 +0530 WP-908.2021.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 908 OF 2021.
(1) Shri Shashikant S. Chunekar,
aged 70 years,
lastly working as Accountant,
at Export Inspection Agency Mumbai,
(Ministry of Commerce, Govt. of India),
Pilot Test ) House, E-3 MIDC, Andheri (E),
Mumbai-400 093 and residing at
A/203, Shivyog CHS Ltd., Sambhaji
Nagar, Ashokvan, ) ) Dahisar (East),
Mumbai - 400 068.
(2) Shri Madhukar S Parab, aged 72 years,
lastly working as Office Assistant
at Export Inspection Agency Mumbai,
(Ministry of Commerce, Govt. of India)
Pilot Test House, E-3 MIDC, Andheri (E),
Mumbai - 400 093 and residing
at A/402, Shashanka CHS Ltd.,
Eksar Road, Borivali (West),
Mumbai - 400 091.
(3) Shri Nanda Dulal Saha, aged 72 years,
lastly working as an Lab Assistant Gr. I
at Export Inspection Agency Mumbai,
(Ministry of Commerce, Govt. of India)
Pilot Test House, E-3 MIDC, Andheri (E),
Mumbai-400 093 and residing at D/103,
Ranjita CHS Ltd., D. N. Mhatre Road,
Eksar, Borivali (West), Mumbai-400 091.
(4) Shri Sonu V. Bhagat, aged 66 years,
lastly working as Care Taker Grade II at
Export Inspection Agency Mumbai,
(Ministry of Commerce, Govt. of India)
Pilot Test House, E-3 MIDC, Andheri (E),
Talwalkar 1
::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 :::
WP-908.2021.odt
Mumbai-400 093 and residing at H. No.
2326, Near Shantadurga Bhumika Hall,
Gokulwadi Sanquelim, Goa-403505.
(5) Shri Jaiprakash K. Sharma, aged 66 years,
lastly working as Laboratory Attendant at
Export Inspection Agency Mumbai,
(Ministry of Commerce, Govt. of India)
Pilot Test House, E-3 MIDC, Andheri (E),
Mumbai - 400 093 and residing at Mangal
Bhawan, Room No. C-8, Chimat Pada,
Marol Naka, Andheri (East),
Mumbai-400 059.
(6) Shri Sudarshan Singh Kushwaha,
aged 72 years, lastly working as Laboratory
Assistant Grade - II at Export Inspection
Agency Chennai, (Ministry of Commerce,
Govt. of India), 6th Floor CMDA Tower II,
1 Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore,
Chennai-600 008 and residing at
House No. 98, Koshi Gali,
Kolhapur - 416216.
(7) Shri Viswanath Kumar Chougala -
since Deceased - lastly working as
Assistant Director (T) at
Export Inspection Agency
Chennai (Ministry of Commerce,
Govt. of India) 6th Floor CMDA Tower II,
1 Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore,
Chennai-600 008
represented by his widow,
Smt. Shakuntala V Chougala, aged 68 years
And residing at Flat 103, D-1 Lunkad )
Queensland, Viman Nagar, Pune 411014 ... Petitioners.
Versus
(1) Union of India through the Secretary,
Department of Commerce
Talwalkar 2
::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 :::
WP-908.2021.odt
Ministry of Commerce and Industry
Government of India, Udyog Bhavan,
New Delhi-110 107.
(2) The Chairman, Export Inspection
Council, Department of Commerce,
Ministry of Commerce and Industry,
Govt. of India, Udyog Bhavan,
New Delhi-110 107
(3) The Director (I & QC), Export
Inspection Council, Department
of Commerce, Ministry of Commerce
and Industry, Govt. of India,
2nd floor, B-Plate) Block-1,
Commercial Complex, East
Kidwai Nagar, New Delhi-110 023
(4) The Deputy Director In-charge
Export Inspection Agency Mumbai,
Ministry of Commerce & Industry,
Government of India, Pilot
Test House, E-3, MIDC,
Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 093.
(5) The Deputy Director In-charge
Export Inspection Agency Chennai,
Ministry of Commerce, Govt. of India,
6th Floor CMDA Tower II,
1 Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore,
Chennai - 600 008 . ... Respondents.
---
Mr. Ramesh Ramamurthy a/w. Mr. Saikumar Ramamurthy, Ms. Seema
Sorte, Advocate for Petitioners.
Mr. S.L. Shekokare, i/b. Mr. Sachin Chandan, Advocate for Respondents.
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND
ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ.
Talwalkar 3
::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 :::
WP-908.2021.odt
RESERVED ON : 25th SEPTEMBER, 2025.
PRONOUNCED ON : 21st NOVEMBER, 2025.
JUDGMENT :(PER ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J)
1. Heard Mr. Ramesh Ramamurthy, learned Advocate for the Petitioners and Mr. Shekokare, learned Advocate for Respondents.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of the learned Advocates appearing for the parties.
3. Petitioners who are the ex-employees of the Export Inspection Council (EIC) and Export Inspection Agency (EIA), by this Petition filed in the year 2021, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are seeking directions against the Respondents to treat each of the Petitioners as Pension optees; for grant of pensionary benefits under Export Inspection Council, Pension and General Provident Funds Rules, 1981; and for consequent changes in their service records, to reflect their status as Pension optees.
4. Export Inspection Council was established by the Government of India, under Section 3 of the Export (Quality Control and Inspection) Act, 1963, for development of export trade of India through Talwalkar 4 ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 ::: WP-908.2021.odt quality control and inspection, prior to shipment/export and matters connected therewith. It operates under the administrative control and supervision of the Department of Commerce, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India. Petitioners joined the services of EIC / EIA prior to 24.10.1981. Since inception of EIC and EIA upto 23.10.1981, the employees of EIC and EIA were governed by the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme (CPF Scheme).
5. Respondent No.1, vide Notification bearing No. S.O. 2922 dated 24.10.1981, published in the Official Gazette, notified the Export Inspection Council, Pension and General Provident Fund Rules, 1981 ("Pension and GPF Rules, 1981"). Notification dated 24.10.1981 is extracted herein below:
"NOTIFICATION New Delhi, the 24th October, 1981, S.O. 2922. - In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 17 of the Export (Quality Control and Inspection) Act, 1963 (22) of 1963), the Central Government hereby makes following rules, namely:
1. (1) These rules may be called the Export Inspection Council, Pension and General Provident Fund Rules, 1981.
(2) They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.
2. The benefit of (i) the Central Civil Services (Pension) Ruses, 1972 as amended from time to time; and
(ii) the General Provident Fund (Central Services) Rules, Talwalkar 5 ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 ::: WP-908.2021.odt 1960 as amended from time to time be extended to all the whole-time and regular employees of the Export Inspection Council and the following organisations constituted under the aforesaid Act, namely:-
(a) The Export Inspection Agency, Bombay;
(b) The Export Inspection Agency, Delhi;
(c) The Export Inspection Agency, Calcutta:
(d) The exeport Inspection Agency, Madras; and
(e) The Export Inspection Agency, Cochin.
Provided that those employees who entered into the service prior to the date of issue of this notification and were governed by the Contributory Provident Fund Rules of the Ex-port Inspection Council of Export Inspection Agency, as the case may be, shall be given an option to continue to be governed by the said rules and the Death- cum-Retirement Gratuity Scheme notified under Notifications S.O. Nos. 1607 and 1608 dated the 30th May, 1981. The option referred to above shall be exercised in writing not later than 31-3-1982 and the options once exercised shall be treated as final."
(emphasis supplied)
6. The cut off date for exercising the option, referred to in the Notification bearing No. S.O. 2922 dated 24.10.1981, was extended from time to time by the following Circulars / Office Memorandum:
Sr. No. Particulars Date of the Extended Time Circulars / Office Memorandum
1. Circular issued by Export 03.04.1982 30.04.1982 Inspection Council.
2. Circular issued by Export 17.05.1982 30.06.1982 Inspection Council.
3. Circular issued by Export 29.06.1982 31.12.1982 Inspection Council.Talwalkar 6 ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 :::
WP-908.2021.odt
4. Circular issued by Export 14.12.1982 31.03.1983 Inspection Council.
5. Circular issued by Export 13.10.1983 31.12.1983 Inspection Council.
7. Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance and Pensions Department of Pension and Pensioners' Welfare, issued Notification dated 01.05.1987 with respect to the changeover of the employees from CPF Scheme to Pension Scheme. Said Notification dated 01.05.1987 contemplated that all CPF beneficiaries who were in service as on 01.01.1986 would be deemed to have " come over" to the Pension Scheme on the date, unless a contrary option was exercised by them in writing by 30.09.1987, to continue under the CPF Scheme. The cut-off date for exercise of option under the Notification issued on 01.05.1987 was extended to 31.10.1987, vide Circular dated 02.07.1987.
8. The Petitioners contend that none of the Petitioners had opted to continue with the CPF Scheme in response to the Notification No. S.O. 2922 dated 24.10.1981 issued by the Respondents at the time of notifying the Pension and GPF Rules, 1981, thus according to the Petitioner by the operation of the deeming legal fiction created by the Pension and GPF Rules, 1981, all the Petitioners became entitled to Talwalkar 7 ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 ::: WP-908.2021.odt receive pension and gratuity as retirement benefits on superannuation or on taking voluntarily retirement.
9. Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 in the counter affidavit dated 23.03.2022 contested the aforementioned claim. They contend that the time limit for providing options under the Pension and GPF Rules, 1981 was extended from time to time, to permit sufficient time to the employees to take a conscious call in their best interest. They contend that the Petitioners had given option in the prescribed format to continue under the CPF Scheme within the cut-off date (extended cut off date). They contend that the Petitioners opted to continue under the CPF Scheme, the same being more beneficial at the relevant time. They contend that the fact of the Petitioners having repeatedly given their options to continue under the CPF Scheme, clearly established the well considered and conscious decision of the Petitioners to continue under the CPF Scheme.
10. Petitioners filed rejoinder affidavit dated 24.06.2022 reiterating their stand in the Petition.
11. Mr. Ramesh Ramamurthy, learned Advocate for the Talwalkar 8 ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 ::: WP-908.2021.odt Petitioners submits that the Petitioners did not opt for continuing under the CPF Scheme in writing before the cut-off date i.e. 31.03.1982, as such, the Petitioners are required to be treated as having been covered by the Pension and GPF Rules, 1981, by way of deemed fiction. He submits that on the date of issuance of the Office Memorandum dated 01.05.1987, the Pension and GPF Rules, 1981 was already in force in the EIC/EIA with identical deeming provisions to bring all employees under the Pension Scheme barring those who consciously opted to continue under the CPF Scheme, therefore, the said Office Memorandum dated 01.05.1987 was effectively applicable to only those employees in EIC and EIAs who during the period 24.10.1981 to 31.03.1982, had opted to continue to remain under CPF Scheme.
12. Mr. Shubham L. Shekokare, learned Advocate for the Respondents submits that the cut off date i.e. 31.03.1982 as mentioned in the Notification dated 24.10.1981 was extended from time to time, vide various Circulars / Office Memorandums. He submits that the Petitioners after considering the benefits under the CPF Scheme, had voluntarily, of their own free will consciously opted for the CPF Scheme. He submits that it is after 30 years, that the Petitioners are attempting to take U-turn by filing the present Petition. He submits that the Petitioners have Talwalkar 9 ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 ::: WP-908.2021.odt suppressed the fact and the documents indicating the Petitioners having exercised the option in the prescribed format to continue in the CPF Scheme on more than one occasion during, the extended time limit of the Pension and GPF Rules, 1981.
13. From the rival contentions of the parties, the point that falls for consideration is whether the Petitioners having exercised the option to continue with the CPF Scheme, would be entitled to switch over to the Pension Scheme?
14. Upon the coming into force of the Pension and GPF Rules, 1981, the following consequences followed:-
(a) The employees entering service of EIC and EIAs on or after 24th October 1981 automatically became members of Pension and General Provident Fund Scheme under the said Rules of 1981;
(b) Those employees who entered service of EIC and EIAs prior to 24th October 1981 and who exercised option by 31st March 1982 to be continued under the CPF Scheme, were to be treated as CPF optees and option so exercised was to be treated as final;Talwalkar 10 ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 :::
WP-908.2021.odt
(c) All other employees of EIC and EIAs, who joined service prior to 24th October, 1981and who did not exercise option to continue under the CPF Scheme, were to be automatically deemed to be covered by the said Pension Rules of EIC and EIAs with effect from 24th October, 1981.
15. Notification dated 01.05.1987 contemplated two situations:
firstly, the deeming provision in terms of which the employee concerned was taken to have "come over" to GPF Scheme; and secondly, the situation being where a conscious option was exercised before the cut-
off date to continue to remain under CPF Scheme".
16. Respondents are on record to state that the Petitioners had exercised their option to continue with the CPF Scheme on more than one occasion. In paragraph No. 11 of the affidavit in reply dated 23.03.2022, the Respondents have summarized the options exercised by the Petitioners from time to time after the Notification dated 24.10.1981 and the Notification dated 01.05.1987. Said chart is extracted herein below :
Sr. No. Name of Petitioner Documents
1 Shashikant S. Option dated 30.03.1983 by petitioner to
Chunekar continue in CPF
Talwalkar 11
::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 :::
WP-908.2021.odt
Option dated 17.03.1986 by petitioner to
continue in CPF
Option dated 29.07.1987 by petitioner to
continue in CPF
Request for salary certificate dated
10.12.1979, 12.3.1980, 2.4.1983, 19.9.1983, 5.4.1984, 22.01.1987, 20.06.1988, 01.07.1988, 15.10.1988, 25.9.1991 And 15.12.1995 2 Madhukar S. Parab Option dated 28.03.1983 by petitioner to continue in CPF Option dated 15.03.1986 by petitioner to continue in CPF Option dated 14.10.1987 by petitioner to continue in CPF Request for salary certificate dated 23.6.1979, 4.3.1980, 24.10.1980, 16.11.1981, 9.12.1982, 16.9.1983, 3.2.1984, 4.8.1987, 20.6.1988, 22.7.1989, 18.12.1990, 17.7.1997, 13.8.1998, 22.1.1999, 5.3.1999, 18.8.1999 and 13.4.2007 3 Nanda Dulal Saha Option dated 30.04.1982 by petitioner to continue in CPF Option dated 15.03.1983 by petitioner to continue in CPF Option dated 24.08.1987 by petitioner to continue in CPF Request for salary certificate dated 16.11.1995 and 26-9-1996
4. Sonu V. Bhagat Option dated 09.03.1983 by petitioner to continue in CPF Option dated 31.03.1986 by petitioner to continue in CPF Option dated 27.07.1987 by petitioner to continue in CPF Request for salary certificate dated 11.1.1984,19.11.2003 5 Jaiprakash K. Option dated 31.03.1983 by petitioner to Sharma continue in CPF Option dated 21.03.1986 by petitioner to continue in CPF Option dated 16.07.1987 by petitioner to continue in CPF Request for salary certificate 20.9.1980 and 24.10.1980 and 01.05.2013 6 Sudarshan Singh Option dated 22.03.1983 by petitioner to Talwalkar 12 ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 ::: WP-908.2021.odt Kushwaha continue in CPF Option dated 21.03.1986 by petitioner to continue in CPF Option dated 01.08.1987 by petitioner to continue in CPF 7 Shakuntala Option dated 30.04.1982 by petitioner to V.Chougala, widow continue in CPF of Lt. Viswanath K Option dated 16.03.1983 by petitioner to Chougala continue in CPF Option dated 15.03.1986 by petitioner to continue in CPF
17. The "Form of option" referred to in the Notification dated 24.10.1982 and the Office Memorandum dated 01.05.1987, are extracted herein below:
a. Option Form in terms of the Notification dated 24.10.1982 ANNEXURE OPTION Having understood the comparative advantage and disadvantages Pensionary and Provident Fund benefits as applicable in my case.
@ i) I opt for the Export Inspection Counci1 Pension and General Provident Fund Rules 1981 extending the benefit of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1972 as amended from time to time and General Provident Fund Rules 1960 as amended from time to time.
@ ii) I opt to continue under the existing Contributory Provident Fund benefits.
Witness : Signature.................
Signature................... Date ...................
Name in full ( in Block letters) Name in full ( in Block letters) Designation................... Designation................... Office .................... Office ....................
CERTIFICATE Applicable only in the case of Group 'D' and illiterate employees Talwalkar 13 ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 ::: WP-908.2021.odt and to be signed by a responsible officer of the Administration Branch of the Office concerned.) The rules were explained to Shri............in my presence.
Signature..................
Name in full ( in Block letters) Designation...............
b. Option Form in terms of the Office Memorandum dated 01.05.1987:
FORM OF OPTION I ................................. employed as ................ designation ............................................ in the Ministry/Department/office of ........................(Name of the Ministry/Department/Office) do hereby opt to continue under the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme interms of the Department of Pension and Pensioners' Welfare O.M. No. 4/1/87 - EIC - I dated 1.5.87.
(Signature of Optee) Place ..............
Date ..............
18. The Petitioners were working as Accountant, Office Assistant, Lab Assistant Grade I, Care Taker Grade II and Lab Assistant Grade II in the EIC / EIA. Records placed before us by the Respondents indicate that the Petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 having made a conscious choice based on whatever was beneficial to them at that point in time and exercised their option in terms "Form of Option", to continue to be Talwalkar 14 ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 ::: WP-908.2021.odt governed by the CPF Scheme. Said option was exercised before the cut off date.
19. The Pension Scheme gave an option to the employees who desired to continue under the CPF Scheme. Petitioners had the option to join the Pension scheme or to continue the CPF Scheme on more than one occasion. As per paragraph No. 11 of the affidavit in reply dated 23.03.2022 filed by the Respondents, Petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 opted to continue under the CPF Scheme pursuant to the Notification dated 01.05.1987. Petitioner No. 7 did not exercise the option to continue under the CPF Scheme pursuant to the Notification dated 01.05.1987 .
20. This Court in the case of Amita Ajit Desai v/s. Union of India1 had occasion to consider the Office Memorandum dated 01.05.1987. In paragraph Nos.11, 12 and 13 this Court has observed as follows :
"11. The controversy is no longer res integra. In the case of Union of India & Anr. Vs. S.L. Verma & Ors., the Hon'ble Supreme Court had an occasion to consider the very same Office Memorandum. It will be helpful to refer to paragraph 7 of the said judgment of the Apex Court which reads as under:
"7. The Central Government, in our opinion, proceeded on a basic misconception. By reason of the said office memorandum dated 1-5-1987 a legal fiction was created. Only when an employee consciously opted for to continue with the CPF Scheme, he would not become a member of the Pension Scheme. It is not disputed that the said respondents did not give 1 Writ Petition No. 1331 of 2017 decided on 17.01.2019 Talwalkar 15 ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 ::: WP-908.2021.odt their options by 30-9-1987. In that view of the matter Respondents 1 to 13 in view of the legal fiction created, became the members of the Pension Scheme. Once they became the members of the Pension Scheme, Regulation 16 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Terms and Conditions of Service of Employees Regulations, 1988) had become ipso facto applicable in their case also. It may be that they had made an option to continue with the CPF Scheme at a later stage but if by reason of the legal fiction created, they became members of the Pension Scheme, the question of their reverting to the CPF would not arise. Respondent 14 has correctly arrived at a conclusion that an anomaly would be created and in fact the said purported option on the part of Respondents 1 to 13 was illegal when a request was made by Respondent 14 to the Union of India for grant of approval so that all those employees shall come within the purview of the Pension Scheme. In our opinion, the Ministry of Finance proceeded on a wrong premise that the Pension Scheme was not in existence and it was a new one. Two legal fictions, as noticed hereinbefore, were created, one by reason of the memorandum, and another by reason of the acceptance of the recommendations of the Fourth Central Pay Commission with effect from 1-1-1986. In terms of such legal fictions, it will bear repetition to state, Respondents 1 to 13 would be deemed to have switched over to the Pension Scheme, which a fortiori would mean that they no longer remained in the CPF scheme."
12 On perusal of the aforesaid observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court, it is clearly revealed that by reason of the said Office Memorandum dated 1st May 1987, a legal fiction was created. It has been held that only when an employee consciously opted to continue with the CPF Scheme, he would not become a member of the Pension Scheme. It has been held that if no option is exercised by an employee, prior to the date specified in the Office Memorandum dated 1st May 1987, the employee shall be deemed to have automatically come over to the Pension Scheme.
13. We find that the aforesaid directions of the Hon'ble Apex Court would clearly cover the case of the petitioners. Undisputedly, none of the petitioner has opted for the CPF Scheme under the Office Memorandum dated 1st May 1987. In that view of the matter, we find that in view of the Office Memorandum dated 1st May 1987, the petitioners would be deemed to be covered by the Pension Scheme."
21. The principle that emerges from the decision in the case of Amita Ajit Desai (supra), is that only those employees who have opted to continue with the CPF Scheme, would not become a member of the Talwalkar 16 ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 ::: WP-908.2021.odt Pension Scheme. If no option is exercised by an employee prior to the cut-off date, the employee shall deem to have automatically come to the Pension Scheme. In the present case, records indicate that the Petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 have consciously exercised the option to continue under the CPF Scheme. No reason is discernible from the pleading and the material on record, for the refusal on the part of the Petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 to exercise their option to be governed by the Pension Scheme while they were in service.
22. In the case of Doctor Mani K. Madala & others v/s. The Union of India Anr.2, Petitioners therein had sought for a declaration of they being entitled to shift from the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme (CPF) Scheme to the General Provident fund-cum-Pension-cum- Gratuity Scheme from the date they had superannuated. Case of the Petitioners was that though the National Institute of Industrial Engineering (NITIE) sought option from its employees, Petitioners exercised an option to remain in the existing CPF Scheme. It was the case of Petitioners that they did not give an option to positively shift from CPF to General Provident Fund, nor refrained from giving any option, however specifically they exercised the option to retain the 2 Writ Petition No. 2960 of 2021 decided on 1st April, 2024. Talwalkar 17 ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 :::
WP-908.2021.odt existing scheme. It was only when the Petitioners found that the decision taken by them by non-opting the Pension Scheme was incorrect, the Petitioners made a request to the NITIE and the Union of India to permit them to change over the scheme from CPF to Pension. Said request was turned down by the Union of India. In the said facts and circumstances, this Court taking note of the positive option, exercised by the employees to continue to be under CPF Scheme, held that once the option was exercised, there was no room to any come back situation. This Court thus found that the action of the NITIE and Union of India of not permitting the Petitioners to change their option after the cut off date, was neither arbitrary nor unreasonable.
23. In view of the above and considering that Petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 are educated persons who have consciously opted to continue with the CPF Scheme, would not become members of the Pension Scheme. Approbation and Reprobation would not be permissible in such schemes. No case is made out for indulgence as far as Petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 are concerned. This Petition is, therefore, dismissed (partly) qua Petitioner Nos. 1 to 6. Rule is discharged to their extent.
24. Petitioner No. 7 (since deceased) did not exercise the option Talwalkar 18 ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 ::: WP-908.2021.odt under the Notification dated 01.05.1987. We, therefore, find that the decision of this Court in the case of Amita Desai (supra) would apply to the case of Petitioner No. 7 and we follow the course as adopted in the said case. Hence, this Petition is partly allowed to the extent of Petitioner no. 7. It is held and declared that the Petitioner No. 7 would be entitled to be governed by the Central Civil Services (Pension) Scheme, 1972. Petitioner No. 7 would be paid pension from the date of his retirement. The arrears of pension shall be paid within a period of six months, however, the arrears will not carry any interest. Respondent No. 2 is entitled to recover the employer's contribution towards CPF along with simple interest at the rate of 8% per annum thereon from the arrears of pension that would be payable to the Petitioner No. 7. Rule is made partly absolute to the extent of Petitioner no. 7.
25. No order as to costs.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) Talwalkar 19 ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 23:04:00 :::