Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (0.32 seconds)Krishena Kumar And Anr. Etc. Etc vs Union Of India And Ors on 13 July, 1990
23. It was held in Krishna Kumar's case that the right of each individual provident fund retiree is crystallized on his retirement after which no continuing obligation remains, while on the other hand, there is a continuing obligation of the State in respect of pension retirees. In the present case on the absorption of an employee holding non-pensionable posts in the Corporation, obligation of the State Government came to an end. These employees became employees of the Corporation and started subscribing to the Employees Provident Fund after transfer of the fund, from their account of Employees Provident Fund. They became members of the employees provident fund. The State Government was not required to contribute towards their pension fund as in the case of employees who were holding pensionable posts. Their rights as such crystallized on the date of their absorption in the Corporation in the year 1982. Now after their retirement, having received the retiral benefits and having ceased the relationship as employees of the Corporation, they cannot agitate their rights after a long period of time. They form a different class than the employees of the State Government holding pensionable posts on the date of absorption.
State Of Rajasthan vs Rajasthan Pensioner Samaj on 23 April, 1991
In State
of Rajasthan v. Rajasthan Pensioners
Samaj, 1991 (Supp) (2) SCC 141,
Supreme Court upheld the judgment
of Constitution Bench in Krishna
Kumar v. Union of India, (1990) 4 SCC
207, explained and clarified the
judgment of Apex Court in D.S.
Nakara's case, (1983) 1 SCC 305 and
held that contributory provident fund
retirees are not entitled to claim a
right to switch over from Provident
Fund Scheme to pension scheme on
the ground of violation of Article 14 of
the Constitution of India. It was found
that widows of Jodhpur C.P.F. retirees
and pension retirees do not form one
homogeneous class but form two
different classes and, therefore, the
widows of C.P.F. retirees are not entitled to opt for pension scheme, as the right to opt for pension scheme cannot be inherited or exercised by the widows of the retirees.
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board vs R, Veeraswamy And Ors on 26 March, 1999
28.8.1982 and that till that date, all such employees were working on above pensionable post even in the Corporation. There was no change in the service condition of such employees and they were extended benefit of Employees Provident Fund Scheme availed by them. In reply to argument with regard to Regulation 39 of the Service Regulation, 1981, framed w.e.f. 19.6.1981, it was submitted that no post in the Corporation is pensionable and hence the petitioners were not prejudiced in any manner and that the provisions of the Government order dated 5.7.1972 were not violated. He had relied upon the judgment of this Court with regard to retirement age of such employees which was held to be 58 years as in respect of the employees of the Corporation and this Court held in Writ Petition No. 29846 of 2002 dated 29.7.2002 that since under the service conditions applicable to such employees on 5.7.1972, they were to retire at the age of 58 years, they cannot be extended the benefits of extension of retirement age by the State Government to 60 years in the year 2001 ; and that inferior service conditions did not mean the applicability of such service conditions which were subsequently amended. Sri Sameer Sharma, relied upon the judgment of Apex Court in T. N. Electricity Board v. R. Veerasamy and Ors., 1999 (82) FLR 174, in respect of his contention that the employees of the T. N. Electricity Board who retired prior to 1.7.1986 were not treated alike to the employees retired after that date, as they did not belong to one class. The workmen, who had retired after receiving all the benefits available under the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme, ceased to be employees of the Board with effect from the date of their retirement. They form a separate class.