Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The petitioner had joined the respondent organization as Scientist in Grade-B in the month of March, 1988 and thereafter promoted to Grade-C in the month of March,1991 and finally up to Grade-E-1 in the month of March, 1996. Till the year 2003 there was no any complaint against the satisfactory service rendered by the petitioner but unfortunately an F.I.R. bearing No. RC1(A)/2003/D7 was registered on 28.01.2003 on the allegations that the officials / employees of CISR-CIMFR including the petitioner, have indulged in misconduct amounting to loss of approximately Rs. 50,00,000/- to the organization in purchase of chemicals, other consumable items and equipments.

The petitioner was not being released his admitted post- retirement benefits as such he made several representations before the Respondent No.2 and also before the Chairman of the Local Grievance Committee, CSIR-CIMFR, Dhanbad. The respondent vide letter bearing reference no. 471 dated 13.07.2017 was pleased to release the Provident Fund dues of the petitioner and the same has been released in his favour. The petitioner is also in receipt of his monthly provisional pension which was sanctioned vide P.P.O. No. 2251/ CIMFR / 2017 dated 04.07.2017.

13. This Court before considering the said issue needs to refer herein the undisputed fact and the law which is applicable to the parties concerned.

14. Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 is the central legislation to look into the issue of pension/gratuity of the public servant working under the Central Government. The respondent- CIMFR although which is not a central government establishment but under the control of the central government i.e. under CSIR registered under the Co-operative Society Act. The CIMFR is to run on the basis of the decision which is to be taken by the Governing Body. Herein the Governing Body has taken decision to adopt the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972.

15. The CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 since has been adopted by the CIMFR and the present writ petitioner was working under the CIMFR and the moment Rule 1972 was adopted, the same will bind the writ petitioner also since he was an ex-employee of the CIMFR.

16. Moreover, the issue of adoption has never been challenged by the writ petitioner before any forum which also clarifies that the adoption of Rule 1972 will be applicable for all the employees working under the CIMFR so long as the adoption is in acceptance.