Delhi Transport Corporation v. J.L.Dhupapr

* % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI I u d q me nt aese rved O n :, zid -xnFig) 2 0 I 0 t w.P.(c) tsztzo]:o DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION .... PCtitiONCr Through: Mrs.Avnish Ahlwawat, Ms.Latika Chaudhary, Advocate VCTSUS J.L.DHUPAPR ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Narottam Vyas, Mr.Vikramjeet Sikand, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOOL CHAND GARG

¶1Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶2To be referred to Reporter or not?

¶3Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRADEEP NANDRAIOG, I. For orders, see W.P.(C) No.1402712009. -n*s1*? (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG) JUDGE AUGUST 10, 2O1O mm h I JUDGE Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. rf tr :1. % IN TFIE FIIGFI t iotn Auous!. 2070 i-UU"rr.(C) L4027l2OOg DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION ..... PCtitiiONCT Through: Mrs.Avnish Ahlwawat, M]s'Latika ChaudharY, Advocate I versus I I .l tvtADHU BHUSHAN ANAND ""' nespjondent Through: Ms.Kittu Bajaj, Adv' I I I 'l w.P.(c) 4AU2ALA II '! DTC " " Petilioner Through: Mrs.Avnish Ahlwaw.at, Ms' Latika Chaudhary, Advocdte i ' versus I I SUDERSHAN LAL SI=IARMA " " Respiondent Through: Ms.Rekha Aggarw.al, Mr'D'S'[(auhtae' Advs. I l. i \J\f.P.(C) s5s/2O1O I ^ "'lj Drc rhroush: Mrs.Avnish Ahlwa*.[:i]fj:t'qi'o-ChaudharY, Advocate I VCTSUS SURESH CHANDERThrough: Mr.S.N.sharma uu.P.(c) 5e.8/2OL0 D ELH I TRANSPORT CORPORATION' Through: Mrs.Avnish Ah Chaudhary, Ad VCTSUS i couRT oF DELI'll AT NEW DE[-l-{ill t. tudoment Reserved On: 29--t! tylv 2'97-0-J I ZILE SINGH Through: w.l).(c) No.L4O27/2009 & connected Matters Mr.N.L.Bareja, ....: Respon , Adv. i It' 'l I I ..... Petitior lwawat, riis vocate i I I I I I ,.... Kespon Adv. i i I edge ..1 A' l, \s -1. w.P.(c) 754|2ALA D.T.C. Through: VCTSUS JAG SH.RAN rhrough: t, ..... Petitioner Ahlwawat, Mb.La'tika Advocate Mrs.Avnish Chaudhary, "1".. \ru"p.(c) L902/2010 D-I-C Through: . VCTSUS SURENDER KUM/\R Through: uu.P"(C) 227 4l20LO VCTSLIS SI-I.GURBACHAN I-At- & ORS. Through: VCTSUS RAJO SAIN I . T!'rrough: Ms.Kittu Bajaj, .... Petition Mrs.Avnish Ahlwawat, ChaudharY, Advocate ..... ResPon Ms.Kit[u Bajaj, AdV. ..... Petitionelr Ah lwawat.' lSJs. Lati ka ..... Respond Mr.i{.L.Bareja, Adv. Ms. Kittu nujuj, I'e ..... Respo Adv. J I Ier Ms I I I I dbi .J-Latika t-n I DF-I-HI TRANSPORT CORPORATION '.... PCtIIIOI Througlr: Mrs.Avnisl't Ahlwawat, Chaudhary, Advocate w.P.(c) 3919/2010 DELH I TRANSPOF.T C.JORPORA'l]ON Throrigh: . Mrs.Avnish Chaudhary, I I ..... Petitioner Ahlwawai, y Advocate i i n'Ls s.Latika.' IL ; Z.of 27 I nder Iir I I oir. r\EJ TJ,LJ adv. '"V. t). (C) No.I4O2.7 !2009 & Co n nected Matters l? & e .l I I I i Respondent 1-w.P" (al 423120L0 DELH I I-RANSPORT CORPORATION ..... Petiti'oner ihrough: Mrs.Avnish Ahlwawat, M's'Latilca ChauclharY, Advocate I VCTSUS SATYA PRAKASH KHURANA Through: Ms.Kittu Bajaj, adv' w.P. (cl 7s6t2o10 DELH I TRANSPORT CORPONNiOT T-hrough: Mrs.AVnish ChaudharY, VCTSUS SOM DUTT Through: Ms.DeePali -F uu"p.(c) 832|2OTO. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION Through; Mrs.Avnish Chaucihary, l: t- ..... Petitioner Ahlwawat, Ms.Latika Advocate i -l I .l I t- ..... Respondent Gupta, Adv. I .: I ,l I ..... Petitionqr Ahlwawat, \/ls.Latika' Advocate I t' versus I I RAM AWAR SHARMA ..... RCSPONQCNT Through: Mr.S.N.Sharma, adv. i i ; P.(c) 75U2aLa I l-|1|TRANSPC,RTCoRPoRATloN......P"titioner t' . Through: Mrs.Avnish Ahlwawat, [vl"s.Latika Chaudhary, Advocate | ' versus I i I I DHUPAPR ..... ResPPndent Througlr: Mr.Narotlam i VYas, M r.Vikramjeet Sikand, 461'5. i SH W. DE J.L. -t-. PTee : of zz .l I. I I I I i W.P.(C) No.L4O27/2009 & Connected Matters IR w.P.(c) 793|2AX"O DEI_H I TRAN SPORT CORPORATION Through: Mrs.Avnish VCTSUS BI-IAGWATI PRASAD Chaud.harY; T'hr"ough: r.384/20LO Ms.Kittu Bajaj, Adv. 'l ..... Petitioner Ahlwawat, Ms.Latika Advocate i I I' I.t. ..... Respondent ..... Petitionei' Mrs.Avnish .Ahlwawat, M;s.Latil<a r'rr J.^v I CltaudharY, Advocate i I' 't I ResponclAnt -t. uu. P. (C) D.T.C. Through: .VCTSUS st-T.RAJENDER SINGH Through: uu.rr"(c) L386/2$10 VCTSUS SI.I.NANU RAI\4 SHARMA Through: vu.p"(a) zosL/201"0 ',,!. l). ( c) irio. 1.4027/20t19 & co n n ected M atters DEI.H I TRANSPORT CORPORATION -fhrough: Mrs.Avnish a' Mr.N.L.Ba reja, Chaudhary, Ad',r. ..... Petitione[ Ahlwawat, Y Advocate I s.Latilca ..... ResPondgnt Mr.N.L.Bareja, Adv. i D-fC ,-l-hror.rgh: Mrs.Avnish Ahlwav'rat, $s.Latika Chaudhary, Advocate i VCTSLIS RANDi-llR SINGH ..... Respond,eirt Througlr: Mr.N.L.Bareja, A.dv' i w.p.(c) 4906/203.{J .l t" I { D E LH I rRAN s Po -1ffi ffi Rl^t^l?I Av n i s h ^# :il:?l"t, -, t*., ChaudharY, Advocite VCTSLI5 i I I I I denL RAMESH CHA[{D jAiN , Respon I Prige 4 oi zl t-w.P.(c) 46Be lzaLo DEBI SINGH Through: w"P.(c) 1639/20xo .HARANJIT BATRA hrough: VCTSUS w.p. (c) T729l201O CI-IARAN KAMAL ThrouEh: versus DTC Through: l 3339/2CI3.O -l-hrough: versuS Ms.DeePali Ms.Kittu Bajaj, VETSUS DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION Through: Mrs.Avnish . ClraudharV,. -t. J DEL.H I TRANSPOROT CORPORATION Through: Mrs.Avnish ChaudharY, Ahlwawat, $'s.Latilca Advocate : -t. t .... Petitionei Ms.Kittu Bajaj, adv' .i i I i .I Respondent -t-w"P.(c) D.T. C. Mrs.Avnish Ahlwawat, [ls.Latika Chaudhary, Advo.cate MrS.Avnish Chaudhary, Ahlwawat, Ms.Latika Mr.Anrit Kumar, Adv. 5 of27 Advocate i PULAK MUKHERJI Through: CORAM: ..... Respondent t-roh!'BLE MR. iusrlcE PRADEFP hIANDBAiOq h{oN'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOOt Ch{AND GAR,G I

1.. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be alldwed to see the judgment?

2.. To be referred to Reporter or not? w.tr.(C) No.t4O27 /2009 & Connected Matters "i Page t I Whetfrer the judgnrent should be 'i i reported in the DiPest? :| With the promulgation of the De|hi , Mqr.ricipa| Corporation Act 1,957 ancl the Constitution of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, municipal tunctions in Delhi except NDMC area and the area fallirrg under the jurisdiction iot the cantorrment Board were vested in the. Municipal Qorporation of llellri, which included the function of providing public trpnsport irr tlre city of Delhi. As^a separate wing of thb corporati:on' the ! Delhi Transport undertaking was constitpted with a separate hrr-rdget anc1 separate staff. As the city of Delhi,grew,i it was tfrought advisable to corporatiz-e public.transport in Dqlhi and tl-rr.rs t_lre Delhi rransport corporation rruas formed as ia body t: corpclrate and it tc,ok over the functioning 'of th? Delhi 'l'ri:nsport Undertaking. The said Corporation had in iplace a contrihutory Proviclent Fund scheme for ilt employees tn9 n,:edless to state each month a fix amount was deductBd from' ll're salary of the emprloyees ancl with a -matching contrihrution. Lry Llre corporation was credited in the fund and'in the account a' Coi.poration agltatecj for long that the pension sclr"t,F of the Gclvernnrent of lndia, which was extended to the rrir-inicipal employees be also extended to them and in respect of whiclr rt, when in the year :.:gg2 the corporation gave an assurance to the supreme court tirat it would introdr-ice a pension scheme for its emi:loye.es, inclr,rding the retired employees and pursLlant tlrereto issued of tlre employee, wlto needless to state \^/as a niernhrq I (,ontribu[ory Provident Fund.' The ernployees j office order No.16 dated 27.JI.I992 notifying that a s;(:heme stood notified which would be'operated bir r of the' of the pension the Life 6 o'F27 W.P.(C) No.L4027 /2009 & Corrnected Matters PaEe t-, .( ./ | t(l f l-I Irrsurance Corporation of India (LlC)' The o urrcler:-"No.Adm-l-5 g)192 l" I rder reads as t I i I 27 .rIi92 I I in DTG as ffice o Dated Sub : lntroduction of Pension Scheme applicable to the Central Govt. Employees' The introduction of Pension scheme for the .employees of the DTC has been sanctioned .by the central -.tttj and conveyed by the M.o.S.T. vide Ietter No,.RT-Lzotgl2rlA-g-rnC dated 23'!!'92 as on thg . tP.T9 .a p;Gh as for the central Govt. employees subject to the fol lowi ng conditjons :-

¶1The Pension scheme would be LIC on behalf of DTC. Pension Scheme would' be operated bYl 'l the a

¶2The date of e'ffect of

3.8.1981.

¶3.All the existing employees including thbse retired w.e.t. 3.8.1981 onwarcls would have the option..to opt for the Pension scheme or the Employees contribqtory provident Fund as at present, within 30 days..froT. t!"'" dilte of issue of this O.O. for the implementation oJf tne pension scheme as approved by the Govt. of Indiai. t.r

¶4The pension Scheme would be compulsory filr all rhe new employees joining DTC w.e.f. 23.I7'.92i ihe date of sanction of the scheme. I I

¶5The Pension scheme would be operated by the Ltc on behalf of DTC. The employees share in the EPF Alc of the DTC employees, who opt for Pension Schenre would be transferred to the LlC, fof operaling'

¶6The employees who have retired on or aftr3r 3',d August 19Bl ancl the existing employee_s-who itrave drawn the employer's share, r]nder'thA EPF Act" $artly or-*notty.shalt frive to refund the same with interest in the errent of their opting fcjr the Pensi.on Scherne' if-.1" toiut: u-o,1nt to be refunbed by the retired ".ptoyues/existing enrployees would be the an\ou,nt thal,would have accrued, had they not withdrawn the employer's share. l W.P.(C) No.1-4027 /2009 & Connected Matters PageT of27 / 2y ':1 (' 7 . Excess amount of gratuity, if alfeady paid tQ:ex-employees and which is not admissible underi. the perjsion Scheme, will have to be'refunde.d. by. them before any benefit under the Scheme, is'grantgd.to them. B. A due ancj drawn statement would be prepiared in respect of retired enrployees opting for Pension scheme and tlre amount to be paid/refunded, vrlould be worked out by the concerned qnit, wherefro4 the employee had retired from service.

¶9lf any of the employee of DTC, who doeE not exercise anV option within the prescribed period sf 30 J-Vr or. qu'it service or dies without exercising an opiion or whose option is .incomplete or condition]al ,or \.r|\JLrvrr vr -r-'- '--"-l- -- ambiguous. lte shall be deemed" to have opted the ' Pension Schenre Benefits. /\pplication forms for exercising option. woulcl be available wi'th the Upit Officers and ali emplQyees irrcluding retired employees wishing tg exdrcise option, shoulcl clo so rruithin the Unit of tlreii pl?1eli worlcing/where'frorn they retired, witlrin a period pf 30 clavs from the date of issue of this Office order.' i The unjt officers, after receiving the option fronl the ex-enrployees, will tal<e further necessary actioh for gettirrg the necessary fot'rns compieted, which will be suppliecl to'them by the LIC for Pension etc. 'they will also ensure the recovery of EPF and Gratqity from the Ex-ernployees. before'forwarding their applicatiops as mentioned above. The cases of all officers will be j ^J dealt with at FleadquarLers. {.6ntrilrutory Provident Fund Scheme together witlr Tlre options received from the existing ernployees for ' rrot opting Pension n'tay be kept in their Pet-sonal file and etrtry macle in theiiService Bock." . i i;" ). A perusal of the scheme shows. that as regbrds the retired employees, they hacl to specifically opt to ,ne paiO 6re:nsion arrcl had to simultaneousiy refund to the CorSforation, fhe employers' slrare received by them as n,iembers of tlre l. I interest w.P.{t:) No.1.4027/2009 & Connected Matters i Page zof27 I -) (vide para 6 of the Scheme). As regards tfte existing ernployees, it was Stated Vide para 4, that the pension scheme w6uld be compulsory for those who joined service under the Corporation with effect from 23.IL.Igg2 and as regaids the ,existing serving employees; vide para 9, it was statpd that those who do not submit any option would be deemed to have optecl for the pension scheme.' Thus, it is apparent'that as regards the existing employees of the Corporation wtjo were still in service when the office order dated 27.'!l'I992 was. prornulgated, if they "desired to continue to be the teTbers of the contributory Provident Fund scheme they f "o to specifically say so, for the reason, their silehce wai to be [reatecl as a deemed option to opt.for the pensiorr sche]me and I nr:eclless to state their positive option to opt for the pension I I sc.heme was alwaYs there. i

¶3with.out worlcing oul-the modalities with the Llc to vvorl< upon and implement the pension schem.e and lwithout cornpleting the formalities of compiling the data as it0 who : optecl or .who had to be treated as tlre deemed opte6 under tfre pensiorr scheme and who specifically opted to conitinue to kie a member of the Contributory Provident Fund Scherhe,.pbst ha:;te, the Corporation notified a voluntary retirer,nent jscheme on 3.3.1993 contents whereof read as under:-i "Sub:-Voluntary Retirement of Employees of iDelhi Transport CorPoration i .l The rnatter pertaining to the introductiqn of voluintary Retirement Scheme for the employees has been 0nder the consideration of Delhi TransporL Corporation. Salient Features of the proposed vbluntary Retireirnent Scheme are as under:-

1.. ApplicabilitY' : The scheme will be aPPlicable to ernployees of the corporation i.e. W.P.(C) No.t4O27 /2009 & Connected Matters a ll rdg ula r workersi and i I I I '-6 l.r executives who are appointed against vacancies in the corPoration.

¶2EligibilitY: lea,re ru les retires regular and of the u nder i" t' I ; Pa\ge 1'0'of 27 / An employee nrust have completed ten ,yeai= .nl service in itris corporation or completed 40 years of age to qualify for consideration under the Scheme' For this purpose, period of deputationiretenticin of lien in the parent office in lieu of deputation priior to absorption in the regular service.of the corporption will be excluded.

¶3Conditions covering voluntary retirement' Voluintary retirement will be normally allowed only in cises of incumbents of the posts vyhich

(a) have been declared suirplus or redunpant' However, voluntary retit'ement Scheme could also be allowed in other cases dependin]g on the merits of each case and in the interest of the corPoration i i

(b) 'Voiuntary retirement cannot be claim,ep by any employee as a matter of right. i The corporation will have the right not to Qrant Voluntary Retirement for reasons tq' be recorded in vvriting. Under no reasons will the relief under tlris scheme be' allowed frorn a date ear'lier than the date of passing the .t orders. i

(c) An entployee in whose case any disciplinary case is pending will not be considered tunder this scheme until the disposal of the samP . i

¶4An employee vvho had taken voluntary retirerirent will be etigiUte to the following refunOs/payrrrerjts:- Balance in his PF Account as per rules of

(a) prbvident furtd applicable to hint.

(b) Encashnrerrt of refused' accumulatecj earned leave es Per corporation applicable to him as if l're the trorrnal rules of retirement. .; \Ai.P.(C) N<t.L4027 /2009 & Connected Matters t. lr d\ Gratuity as per payment of gratuity actiand

(c) Gratulty as per payment ol 9IdLUrL! dLLtorl gratuity Rules of the corporation applicable to hj*.

(f) Expenses for travelling for the entitled class for it''" "1.1^1ployee and his/her family'comprising .his/her spouse'an-O dependent members from the plaf: 9l his/her posting to the place where he/she intends to month,s basic pay plus DA for such completed iyear of service limited to one month pay multiplied by

(e) An Ex-Gratia payment equivalent to I-Il2 the number of whose month of service left bqfore normal datb of retirement.

(d) .Three month notice the individual case as Per employment. DTC Boa rd.' This 'issue with the aPProval a uthority. " pay as is aPPlicable in the terms of him/her i rl of compgtent I I I a settle down in India. t. i 't

(g) trensionary benefits as per of'fice'oinder n[""rO dt.27.n-1.9t' (Emphasis supplied) i : All amourrts due to the corporation will be adjusted against the payments under (d) & (e) above and the employee concerned should.ciear any outsta{Oinq cjues/advances taken before the 'date of effelct of vol ur ntarY reti rement. I Ernployees working on the post of Conductor ih the Corpoiation are proposed to be covered unclelr the Voluntary Retirement Sclreme in the 'tirst instarice. Such Concluctors who are desirous of seeking voluntary retirement in the proposed Schem.e' rnay give their option in the prescribed Performa thriough proper channel within 15 days to be concerneQ Unit Officer who rrvill forward the same to the Secrdtary,

¶4Needless to state, the VRS Scherne clearlyinotified that those who oPt tcl pension as Per (vide para 4(g) of the VRS Scheme)- W.P.(C) No.LaO27/2009 & Connected Matters I 'for voluntary retirement would be ientitled i the office order NJo.16 dated 27.i-l-.l992 Page 3.1 of 27 i'' I I "-0' A j

¶5Soon thereafter vide office memorandumi

16.3.1993 the VRS Scheme notified on 3 ollen, for offers to be submitted hry all Corporation. The officer memorandum'dat zr:; r.rtlder:- "Now, it has been decidecj to correr all the emplo[ees of the corporation under the proposed Volu0!ary Retirement Scheme-Such emPloYees who i"are desirous of seelcing voluntary retirement' in i the proposed scheme rnay give their option in i !' I r, ----^-t^ - - -r-^^^^l rnri$hii i'the I res c ri bed p rotb rm a th ro u t h -p ro p e r ch a n n e l.,yft-!-ln ^1: buyr to the cgncerned Unit Officers, who will forward the same to the Secretary, DTC Board"' When DTC notified the pension scheme on .3.1993 wad .i employees i ecl 16.3.1993 .dated made of the , reads I1993 the w,p.tc) W.P.(C) Page L7 of 27 t

¶6l- ?"1 .1-'L.Lgg?-, the respondents of W'P.(C) Nos. t402ll 2009;'

4.0:t./7-010, 565t2010,. 598/2010, 75412.010, 19cli2/2010, ?..214.12010 (3 in numb,er) and 3g:-:g12010 specifically opted for [l'rr.: pension schenre, The respbndents of iW'n'tCl l\cr:;.423 l2O1-0, 7561?010, 832120L0,. 752:2OJ]O, 7 g;PlzOI}, 1 3il4/2010, 1386/2t)10 and 2as:-poto clicl not subfiit any. cptions and hence were to be treated as deemed opfees for' plerrsion ' ' i '7 . lt may hre noted'that the writ petitioners ofiVi/.P.(c) Nos. L63912010 and 1.729 120'J.0 also did not submit anyloptions aild hence would be cleernerJ to be optees for pensiorr. I B. ll may also be noted that the respondeni otiW'P-(C) l\1o.4906 120L0 and the writ petitioner of W.P,(C) wo.+6b9 l20lr} .sr-rbrnitted their options expressly stating th.at they dci not opt I'or the pension scheme, me?ning thereby, they indicated i frcsitively that they woulcl lilce to continue to be merl'rbers of tlre Contributory Provident Furnd Scheme. I

¶9On different dates, but all. in the year responclents of ali the writ p,etitions except No.1.639 p.A7.A, t'V.P.(C) No.1729 20!0 anci W.P,(C) Na.1.4027 /2009 & Connected N4atters al i t)

10.

¶11Nlo.3 33912010 and the writ petitioner of w.P.(c) No.46Bi9/2010 sr-rbnritted offers under the VRS Scheme afore-noted and requested to be relieved from service' It is thus apparent that if request for volluntary rel-irement was atcepted, the said reSpondents and tfre writ petitioner of w.P.(c) No.4689 l201o, would or .would inot be errtitled to pension would depend upon whether thpy or anvone of them had specifically opted to continue unUer the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme. We say so iot the reason, pertaining to the existing employees, the fi'ension sclreme irotifiecl on 27.LI;rgg2 clearly stated that thoise who specifically opted for the pension scheme and tho?g who strbmitted no option whaLsoever would be treated as oflting for t6e pension scheme and only those who specifically oipied to continue to be members of the contributory Provident Fund Scheme would not be treated as optees'under the pension sc-lreme ancl would continue to be retained as memberb of the Corrtriburtory Provident Fund Scheme i Thus, it is apparent that the respondent otiW'P.(C) Ncr"zl.906 I2OIO and the writ petitioner of W.P.(C) No'4689 120l-0, Iraving exercised'a positive option to continue to be rletained as trlembers under the Contributory Provident Fund Sclreme, courld under no circumstance claim benefit under the lpension sc frem e.

7.2 a ln the year L994, by and under a notification dated

5.I2.Igg4., all employees of the Corporation e,x'cept pfficers, .t Traf-l=ic 5upervisors, Tls, ATls, Vehicle Examiners and 1Oriv"lt, were given another chance to opt for Voluntary Retirelrnent by . sgbmitting letters of offer. The scheme notified stateCi tfrat att l-erms as per the VRS Schem'e dated 3.3.1993 would apply. ! But, the said notification expressly stipulated the. fbllowing conclition:- W.tr.(C) No.I4O2712009 & Connected Matters i .q-r 'i ,,[t is also n6tufieU f,or lnfonrmation of a6 $uctr employees who opt for vR,s that they ,wotrldi nelt v.rrlsrvt sYE be "en{itled to join Pension Scl'lerne if "t['leyi are allowed retirernent unden VR,$" Other sqlient features of the proposed VRS will remain the san.!e as announced earlier vide this office circular d;ated

03.03.1993." (Emphasis added) On 23.I2.L994 another circular was issued t I :1. :r 5. extencling the right to make offer by all the emirioyees perLaining to the VRS Scfreme notified on ,5.1?'1-994.' T'lrereafter on 8.5.1995, to a specified category of employee: stipr-rlatecj in the scheme were given the option toisubmit ot.lers under the Voluntary Retirement scheme. But thpre was I alt express condition therein that these employees wQuld not hrr: entitled to join the pension scheme.

¶14The writ petitic.rners of W.P.(C) Nos.1639/2q10 and 'l.l29;ZO]10, wlro were tleemed optees under the 'pension - :;cherne, having exercisecl no option 'at all pursUantl to. the -l J. rrotil=ication rCate d 27.11.1992, s.ubmitted-offer to-be volluntaiily rertired orr 4.1.1995 and 1.7.10.1995. i -l-o put it in a nut-shell, all employees virfro are a lit.igating under the various petitions either as the petitioner or '; as l-he respondents, except the two petitioners of I.W.P.(C) Ncrs.1639/2010 and I7zgf2A]rA, submitted offer letter:s to be ! volurntarily retired under the VRS Scheme notified on 3i:.f g.g:, I wlriclr contained the ternrs of the scheme and as ei<terrded f'rom time to time iri ihe year 1993.

1.6, As regards W.P.(C) No.3339120l-0, the respondent thereof had re[ired on 70.7.1991 i.e. before the not'ification c.latecf 2-7.7-7..1992 was issued and as regards him, videi para 6, il'he dicl not specifically opt for the pension scheme within 30 c]avs oF Lhe notificatiort datecl 27.11.1992 he would have got 'l rlo benefit under the pensit:n scheme .for the reason on his ?age 14 of 27 W.P.(C) No.1,402712009 & Conneited N4atters I L .8 .ra( (\ retirement he was paid over the dud i'e. the amourit to his cr-edit under the contr:i.butory Provident Fund Scheme' i Had he exercised such an option he was obligqd.to have refurided the rnanagement's contribution credited to his account under the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme' i l.l.Thus,wecalrconvenientlysegregatethel'itigating parties in three .compaftments. Those who exercised option j'or voluntary retirement in 1993. Those who exerciseid option lor-voluntary retirement in the year 1995 l-aStly the respondent of w.P.(C) No.3339 l2}lo whose case r.'+t to be clealt with de-hors,the Voluntary Retirement Schemes' l-8. We deal with the grievance of'. the Cor;poration pertainin'g t.o w.P.(C) No.3339 l2Ol]O, the respondentiwhereof lrers got benefit from.the Central Administrative l-fribunat, wlrere vide order dated 15.1..2010'his. claim has beerj allowed by holding that he is a deemed optee for pension'as per the pension scheme notifierJ on 2-/'11'1992 i lg.Nodiscer.nablereasonsareforthcomingfromthe clecision of the Tribunal save and except that the Tripunal has , treated his entitlement in terms of clause I of thg pension sclreme dated 27,71..1992, ignoring the fact. that iclause q appliecl to the serving employees oF OtC and ih rpspect of t-hose who had retired prior to the promulgation of the . notification dated 27.Ll.lgg2, were required to eSercise a positive option to be given pension with concomitain! act of . refr-rnding the management's share rec'eived by them under' tlre Contributory, Provident Fund Scheme, vide para' 6 of the. notification clated 27.11..1992. Indeed,.this has beel to lteld kly a Division Bench of this Court in the decisibn dated

16.3.2000 in LPA No.33/19 98 DTC Vs. Sh.Baiinath 4haraav &' Ors. which decision has..been upheld by the SupremP Court in w.P.(C) No.I4O27 /2009 & Connected Matters Fage L5 of 27 fr t.l-rr: decision reported as (2001) 6 SCC 61 Et'nplovees Association & Ors. Vs' DTC & Ors'

¶20Thus, as regarcls W.P.(C) No.3339 PAJj is concerned, noting that the respondent therein could inot be " Lr-eated as a deemed optee tor the pension scheme andihaving '. .! nr:t specifically opted for the pension scheme and ihaving' r-ec:eived all dLles payable to him when he retired as per the affioLtrrt lyirrg to his credit as a member of'the contqibutory Provident Fund Scheme and obviously he having not opted for tire pension scherne ancl thus not.. having returnbd the nranagernent's contribr-rtlon pertaining to him and as gredited in l-ris account as a member of the corriributory Provideht Fund scheme, said responclent wouicl.have no case at all.

¶27Thus, w.P.(c) No.3339/2010 is allowed.. lmlpugned iurJglment. and orrjer dated 15.1.2010 allowing TA Ncr.1209 l2}0g is set aside and TA No.1209/2009 is disnjissed"

2.7. We take up tlre case of the petitioners of iW.p.tCl Ncrs.1639/2010 and L72gl2OI0, who were jn service as on ?-7.IL.Igg2 and dicJ not surbmit any option .under the nolification dated 27.1.1.1992 and hence vide clause githereof wr,rulcl be treated as deemecl optees for the pension scl'ieme. i As is noted . hereinabove, these two respiclndents t ap,plied to'oe voluntarily retired by submitting offers on

4.1..1995 and 17.10.1995 respectively. lt is further to tie,noted, tlrart by then the voluntary retirement schemes notifiefl earlier I l-rErr1 lapsed and they could seek voluntary retiremenf. as per Llre scherne notified on 23.J.2.L994 and 8.5.1995 res{ectively i.e. tlre VRS Schemes hotified prior to the dates 4.1.1995 and l'i.:t0.1995. As is notecl irereinabove both schemeis. under wl-riclr the.v applied sprecificaily excludecl eniittenipnt for pension inasmuch aS the tvvo schennes clearly stAted t-hat enrployees opting for voluntary retirement under ihu two :, DTC Retired ) ?:1. w.P.(C) No.1.40)712009 & Connected Matters Page 15 of t7 5\ , ; I schemes would not be entitled to pension; and as t"girds the otlrer terms and conditiOns it was mentioned that the same woulcl be as per the scheme notified on 3.3.1993.'

24.. It is apparent that the terms of the VnS ,scheme rrotifiecl on 3.3.1993 are incorporated by reference uqlder the VRS Schemes notifiecl on 23.L2.Lggl. and 8.5.1995i except cla11se 4(g), for the reason in the two VRS Schqmgs in' qr-restion, there is a specific referenie to not being entitled to pension. We may re-note the conditions/terms of the said two sclremes with reference to the language rmhich ekpresSly : stated that it was notified for information of the eniployees. flrat all those who opt for VRS under the two schem.es would rrot be entitled to join the pension scheme if they areiallowed t:o retire under the said schemes and that otheri salient ; features of the scherne would be the same as per the office circular dated 3.3.1993.

25.. lt may be noted that the pension schemeinotified on 27 .l-I.L992 could not be implemented becausg'LlC backed out arrd it was only on 31.10.1.995 did the Central.Govbrnmen'L provide the necessary fund and only those empioyees who rel:ired after 1.11.1995 started receiving pension. !n other i w(lrds whether or not pension would have been paid rbmained inc.lroate till 31.10.1995.

¶26Having retired pursuant to the VRS S-chemes I rrotified on 5.12J-994 and 8.5.1995, we see'no scope.for [he petitioners of W.P.(C) Nos.1639/2-01-0 and !72912A70 to be entitled to receive any peirsion and we hold that the iTribunal lrars correctly dismissed their clairrr petitions. 2-t. To be fair to the said writ petitioners, we rnay note llrat the only submission urged by their: counsel was:Lhat the. orrJers relieving them ancl enclosing the amount lying to tlreir credit in the Contributdry Provident Fund Scheme relerrecj to 'i Pa,ge 17. of 27 'l I I I .l I ,I w. tr. ( C) No.1"4027 I 2009 & Co n nected rvl atters v rhe fact that rhey were being retired as per thb vRs pcheme datecl3'3.1993andaSextendedtoa|ttheemP|olleeson 16,3.1993. Predicated thereon was the s'ubmission thbt these employees have been treatecl as having voluntarilyi retired under the vRs scheme notified on 3'3'1993 whiclr staited that " nension would be Paid Suffice would it be to state that a bare pgrusal of ?-8. SuTrl ce wuulu lL L'E L\r JLeLv i ' lhe,orders refei'rerj to by learned counsel' evident?.thu' a llrintedproformahaSbeenused.TheSamepertainedtothe carlier vRS Schemes. lt is settled law that ri$hts are determirrednotr,vithreferencetothel?nguageoftheyrlforma. but the statute or th.e scheme appiicable. The saicl two petitioners subnrittecl offers to be.voluntarily reiired {nder the ' sclrenres notified on 5 .I2.lgg4 and 8'12'1995' furtirer' they receivetJthe'chequestenderecltotlremwhich.inc|Udedt|re. rTianagement,sshareintheContributoryProvidentFund lcccunt. These cheques were received by them on dt'3'1995 i ;rnd 31.10.1995 respectively. '|"u encashed the iche.ques, \A/e may note tlrat these two petitigners had filed wri( petitions t7 res6iectively layihg a ictaim for 1:ension whicfr were transferred to Lhe Central Aclministrative 't'ribunat and registered as TA No.689i2009 I and TA ' NJo.1385 |2aog respectively, which have been c|isn.rissed by the Tribunal vicje impr,rgned order dated 23.9.2009 Thb claim of tlrese writ petitioners wclulcl even otherwise be barr:ed by'the' law of limitati,cn. The principle that right to recei're ipension is a conLinuous cause of action is not availabl,e to them'inasmuch a5 Clua .tlrern, Lhe issue was whetlrer they were entltled tq r-eceive clues as per Contributory Provident Futid sClreme or r.rncler. the pension scheme. They were paicl frrll dues wlren tlrey retire<j on 31..3.1995 and 31.10'1995 respectirlely as pel ' tlre Contributory l-'iovidenL Fupd Scheme and if they iiad any ,l t w.P.(C) No.14027 2009 & crnnecled Matlers Page 18 uf 2.7 * cJrievance pertaining to the same, it had to be brough,t before ar Competent Court within at most 3.years thereafter' :' ll Thus, W.P.(C) Nos.1639/2010 and 1729129]-0 are I

¶293r. .t' dismissed.

¶30pertaining to the remaining 18'writ petitiions, we may divide the same into 3 further categories which iemerge I'ronr tlre facts noted by us in para 6 and.B above Thq sajd 18 writ petitions are divided: Category 1-Respondents oi W P.(C) Nos. L4027 12009, 4OI|20LO, 565/2010, 598/2010, 714120]-0, 790212010, 227 412010 and 39 L912010 who specificalf y opted for the pension schemes when they submitted tlreir 'pffer for [reing voluntarily retired as per the terms. and cgnditions, rrotified in tfre VRS Scheme notified on 3.3.1993 wfiich was' rnade applicable by reference to the subsequent lchemes rrotified in the year 1993. . Category 2-Resporrdent!; of W.P.(C) Nlos.423 l2o]r0, 756120110, B32]2O7O, 75212010, 7?312010, :l.l84/2010, 1386/2010 and 205U2010 who lraViing not submitted any options have to be treated as deemeql clptees l'or-the pen5ion scheme when they submitted their lcifier for i' brr:ing voluntarily qetired as per the terms and conditions rrotified in the VRS Scheme notified on 3.3.1993 which was rnade applicable by reference to the subsequent schemes I rrotified in tlre year 1993. CaLegory 3-Respondents of W.P.(C) Nlc) j490612010 and the writ petitioner of W.P.(C) No.4Q89l20L0 wfro specifically opted to be retained in the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme. We take category 3 first. Surprisingly, one plaimant being the respondent of W.P.(C) No.4906120L0 has'su:cceeded l.refore tlre Tribunal and the other i.e. the petitioner of W.P.(C) Nlo.4689 l2OL0, has lost, notv,rithstandi'ng their cases being identical. W.t,.(C) No.MO27/2009 & Connected Matters Page !9 of 27 (>\ t. i 'l I I I DLrnal In i t

¶32Having perused the reasons given by the Tri favour of the respondent of W.P.(C) tilo.490612010 as pier para ?.'2. of the impugned order dated 1.3.4.2010, sufficg woqld it be ro state that the Tribunal has gone off at a complete tangent by reFerring to some policy decisions dated 30.4'19t93 and

7.5.1993 which refer to those who have given noi option whatsoever to be treated as optees under the i:ension' sclreme. We fail to utrderstand as to how said clecisigns can. ap6rly to the responclent of W.P.(C) No.4906lZOlO who specifically opted to be retiined as a member unfer the corLributory provident Fund scheme. Noting further tlrat said re:;pondent received the. full amount payable to hiin as a I rnr:rnber of the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme which I inclr.rded the managemertt's contribution in the.fund peirtaining to his account, it would be another reason to hold against him and lastly that having retired in the year 1993 anq leceived futl dues in tlre sarne year he could not rake up the'issrge when fre filecl oA No.2053 l20)g in tlre year 2009 before the Jrib.unal. \i\/e concr-ir with the reasoning given by the Tribunal pqriailing tcr tlre writ petitioner of V'/.P.(C) No.4689l2AL0 wIen OA hlo.237 LlzOOg filed by him was dismissed vide orddi-dated

18.2.2010. :]:1. :i4. Tlrurs, W.P.(C) No.4.689l2O10 is dismissed. W.P.(C) No.4 906120L0 is allowed. Tl're impugned orcler clated 1.3.4.2010 allowing Or\ No.2053/2009 is ancl OA No.2053/2-009 is disnrissed. sbt aside :15. -l-!-re cla.im of the respotrdents in categorli' 1 and 'l r.ateglory 2 nray be taken up together-for the reason whethei' [-lrey exercised a pOsitive option ro be broug]it uriOei-the pension sclieme or having exercised no optiorr wliatsoever and lic.rrce as deenrecl optees lreing brouglrt under the ipension scherne, their status would be the Same aS en'title'cj Io be i .t W. P. (C) No.1.402'7 I 2.009 & Co n n ected l\4a tte rs . F alqe ?-O of 27 brought under the pension scheme under the notification clated 27.L:^.Igg2. since all these respondents applied .for being voluntarily retired when the scheme notified on 3i3'1993 was extended from time to time in the year 1993, they certainly would be entitled to pension for the i'easoni 'clause 4tgl of the scheme notified on 3'3'1993 clearly stated that sUclr persons would be entitled to pensionary benefits' But' tlrere are certain further facts which need'to b'e noted qua thenr. The case of the corporation is that having opted under the pension scheme or deemed to have opted unjler the 6lension sclremd, the said respondents-specifically oQtect out trom the pension scheme and by th.e time they retirep under tlre Voluntary Retirernent scheme, the pension sche'me had not been formally brought into effect (as noted ebovb it was lormally brought into effect for the retirees who retiied post

1.1.1.1-q95), they filed apptications speclficatly statinq that they in[end to opt out of the pension scheme and b,e retained as nrembers under the Contributory Provident Fund Schqme and .l thus on accepting their offers to be voluntarily .ret'ired the C.orporation paid over to tlrem not only their share in the contributory Provident Fund AccoYnt but evf n the rn;lnagement'S Share, wlrich they accepted withclett de'mur and I lrence coulcJ not.rake up the issue after 12 to 15 yiears i'e' vvhen Lhey filed either wriL petitions in this Court which were t.rainsferred to the Central Administratirre Tribunal ior. filed original Applications before the Central Admi(istrative l-ribunal.

¶36i i Qua these respondents, it may be noted ithat the respondent of w.P.(c) No.14027t2009 submitted a letter dated

2.3.1995 specifically stating that he cloes not want tb opt for I t.lre pension sc'heme ancl desires his dues to be paid a;s per his cpF Account. The respondent of w.P.(c) No.565/2.01q likewise 4( w W.P.(C) No.t4O27/2009 & Connected Matters I P'aae 27 of 27 t" -l I .I i 't ! I I .t. s6 sr-rbmitted a letter on t2.7.1995. The respondent of iW'P'(C) No.598/2010 likewise submitted a letter in the year 1Q94 and reaffirrned the.said fact in the letter dated 5'11'1998' The" resprrndent of \ /.P.(C) No .754120]0 likewise submitted la letter ori 20.4..1995. T'he respondent of w.P.(c) No.19Q2l2OI0 liicelvise submitted a letter on 1,4.7.1995. The 3 resppndents of w.P.(c) No.227 412070 likewise ' submitted letlers

11..3 .Igg4, 15.3 .Igg4 and 9.6.1995 respectivety': Thg responcletrtofW'P.(c)No.3919|20Io|ikewisesubmitted letter on 22.7.1996.. -l-he respondent cf W.P'(C) No'af 3/201q lit<ewise sr_rbmitted a letter on 5.10.1994. The r:espoq'rdent Of w.p.(c) N o.75612010 likewise submitted a letter on 1! .3.1994 .l ers claimed by tlre DTC but deniect. by said respondernt' \iVe note tlrat DTC has proc.iuced sairj letter ancl addltionjall5r has. rr:liecl upon a list pre'pared on 1'2'4.lgg4 where the-hame of I sairl responclent is at.serial No.1.1s ancJ notes his opting out for 1:errsion. The responCent of W.P.(C) . No.83212010 ilikewise. submitted a letter on 5.9.1995. The respondent of1 W'P'(C) Nio.752/2010 likewise submitted a letter on 1.12.19.93., The re.:;pondent of W.P.(C) trlo.40U2010 also opted ou! r:f the pension scherne, though tlre date when he did so is not on rsicord i 71 . tt may be noted that ait .aforesaid ,urdofiuents rjxc-ept the respondent of W.P.(C) No.75617010,"who clginrs not to have written letter dated 15.3.L994,.and the respoindent of \iV.P.iC) No .40112010 who is silent on the aspect bf hiis having opted out i.e. has chosen not to' rebut the ple{ of the ' Corporatiorr that he opteci out of the. pension scherne, have prlrlacied that they wrote the letters out of compulsionibecause il: was uncertain whether at all the pension schenre rlvould be irrtrocluced and there was complete uncertainty urhetller-at all W.l, (C) No.1t412't12009 & Connected Matters ,1.J a (l e22af27 Pag I I I I I I I t. scheme would be introduced and ye5, from

¶38Qua the stand taken by the respondent of W'P'(C) No.756/2010, suffice would it be to state that DiC has 'I procluced the letter written by hinl under his signatuFesi I lt is. a lrandwritten letter. He has not denied that the writinE is not lris. He has not denied his signatures thereon' HiS vague clenial that he never wrote the letter, withogt taking ppecific stand is neither here nor there. Further, as 1." would be noticing qua the other respondents he received the CFF dues vvhen he retired with effect from 31,5'1993 and thgreafter received the cpF dues and kept quiet till he filed a writ ipetition in this Court in the year 2008 which was transferre{ to the CerrLral Administrative. Tribunal in the 'year 2009 uind was registerecf as TA No. L44gl2OOg. . . | , I

¶39Proceeding fr-rrther, we note that the pleadipos oua when the respondents of W.P.(C) . Nos' 79312d10, J,38t4p070, 1386/2010 and W:P.(C) No.2051l2O1-0 submitted appl.ications to opt outt of the pension schemes are not clear, but it is not in dispute and it is the joint case of the Corporation asi well as saicl respondents that they i.e. the respondents of the gaid writ petitions subsequently opted out of the pension schejme and' i received all dues under the CPF Scheme. They dfso claim that i they dicl so because it was not certain as to whether at all pension scheme would be brought into force when'they . voluntarily retired in the year 1993.

¶40In a nut-shell all these respondents plead tfat they were under compulsion to opt out of the pension scherpe after t-lrey had submitted their offer to be voluntarily ietiired and al'ter the. same was accepted and' they stood i retired; compulsion being the uncertainty of pension being fiaid and i tlreir pressing need for funds. The legal.argument aijvanced ,l W.P.(C) No.L4027 /2009 & Connected Matters tlre pension whiclr date. q /11 {t Pai,ge 23 ol27 j{ |iythemisthatoncetheirofferforbeingCompuIsoriIy Wasaccepted,thecontractstoodconc|udedbytheacce of the offer and the terms of the contract was as contai the \/RS Scheme notifiecl on 3.3.1993, which specificall! retireO .ptance tneo In stated ;whether i tl-rat such retirees would be entitled to pension' Thev claim that later on, the conti'act could.not.be modified and thjus their subsequent lqtters to opt out of the pension scherne and. SUDSgqLlel lL lsLLsr J \'v vv' t- - ; revert back to the cPF Scheme could not be.accepted' j The argument of the said respondents hu: to be I a a notedandrejectedforthereasonnothingpreventedihu pafties to novate the contract. lt is settled by now thqt a VRS Scheme has an element of contract. The vRs SchuT" is an iryvitation to offer. The employees make an o'tfer'urjOer tne .f :;clreme being, to retire on the terms notified as lp=t the .scheme. on being accepted, the letter of offer results in the corrtiact being concluded and the employees becomeientitled t. t.o the dues as perthe VRS Scheme.. But, nothing prevents the parties to novate the contr.act. tn the instant case the icontract g;ot novated when the said respondents wrote that in$tead of being paid pension as per the scheme they be. paid qhe due.s a:; per the CPF Scheme and thereafter they received even the rnanagement's share under the. CPF Scheme. lt is settled law .tl-rat one manner of accepting an offer is to perfprm the oltligation to be performed as per the offer. Thus, b54 rnaking payment under the CPF Scheme the Corporation acceipted the crffer of these employees to forego claim for' pension and instead entire due under the CPF Scheme be paid' 41 . /tr"?.. There'remains then the issue to be decided ifre said respondents were under a compulsion and if .yes the afl'ect thereof. i 1t3. The compulsion alleged bY of pension being released. As. noted fry.tr.(C) No.L4027/2009 & Connected Matters them is the untertaintY hereinabove thq Pension I PVge 24 of 27 ,L9 scheme notified on 27.!Llg92 could not take off beca,u SC LIC clicl not fund the scheme.as envisaged and later on the icentral Government agreed to fund the'scheme on 31'10'19;95 and irrclisputably those who retired after 1.11-1995 weie paid . 'i, pension. Thus, the compulsion resulting as the consequence clf tlre uncertainty of pension being released, which mdy have q bee.:n uncertain when the said respondents opted" receive pension and reverted to receive benefit und.er CPF, came to an end on 1.11.1995' The silence of these respondents for periods ranging from 12 to 15 yeaf: when ' they tool< recourse to legal action is clearly"inditative of there ' being no compulsion. The silence of these respondentsi speaks for itself. lt is apparent that with the passage of timre these re:;pondents became clever by a dozen and.thought rlvhy not t;rl<e the benefit of a few who likewise went to CoUrt and I obtained relief, by pulling wool over the eyes of the Gourt by pleacling that their act of subsequently opting outi 'of the 5lension scheme was meaningless because the contrapt' stood' crtnclr-rcled, a submission which was accepted by thq ii Courts without considering the further issue of contract being novated.

¶44wlratsoever to receive pension. They novated the conltract by volition when they subsequently opted out of the ipension scheme and DTC accepted the same and paid. to them even the management's share in the CPF account. Their ctiirrrs are lrit by delay,rlaches and limitation. They are not "nititled to plead that right to receive pension is a continuous. cauSe of action, for the reason, in law either pension can be recLived or ; benefit under the CPF account. lf the managemen[ forces clown the gullet of an employee paymen.t' under lhe CPF Scheme and the employee desires pension he.has to alpproach I Pige 25 of 27 : I II.l It I I out to \-[ ln our opinion these respondents have nio claim W.P.(C) No.1402712009 & Connected Matters hb P tfre Court or the Tribunal within a maximum period of being tlre limitation prescribed to file a suit' /16. Irave

¶47years.. That apart, if it was the case of the respondents

¶45Inat aparu, lr lL wds Llle Ldrc ur Lrrs ''."Y".t tfiat they were compelled to opt out..of pqnsion schqme o.n account ol' the uncertainty in the implementation iof the perrsion Scheme, they ought to have Sought a declaratiion that. their act of opting out of the pension scheme be declaied null ancl void, being out of conrpulsion and for said prayer they ought to have made the requisite'pleadings entitlihg tfne.m for such a declaration. Needless to state an act out of cofrpulsion is a voidable act and not a void act. The responclen[s have-adnrittedly not done so. lt is only in the rejoinderfiled pV them t6 the reply to their respective OA that a bald plea h9s been set forth that they acted out of compulsion when theV opted or-r1, of tfre Pension scheme. Accordingly, we hold that the said \,vrit qetitions i to be aliowedj i We allow W.P.(C) Nos. L4027 12009, 4qU20I0, I 565/2010, 598/2010, 754120L0, l,g02l20r=ci, 22( 412010 I 3919i2010, 423120]10, 756120l-0, B32l2AlA, - 7\212010, t -c)3120L0, 1.3841201A, f3B6/2010 and 2051/?010 Pnq set asicle the impugned orciers dated 30.6.2009, 3;8.2009,

3.g'.2009, 23.9.2009,'25.g.2009, 8.10,2009,. 13.i0.ZOOg, '.i

4.J.L 2009 and 26.11.2009 i.e. the. singular or compositp orders clisposing of one or more Transferred Application or"iO.riginal i Application b.efore the Tribunal and A: u consequencej dismiss all the Tr-ansferred Applications or Original .Appilicatiotrs allowed in favour of the respective respondent(s). 4tf . To summarize tlre 21 writ petitions stand disposed of as under:- t\. W.P.(C) No.163912OLO, W.P.(C) W.P. (C) t{o.aGB9l2010 are clismissed. : w.P.(C) No.MOZI/2009 & Connected Matt€'rs t / {; No.1729|2QIA and .l I i' 'l ' ,. | -- P'aige 26 of 27. I^l ! I i I I I I I I I I a i I/+

13.W.P.(C)No.14027l2OOg,W'P'(C)No'40L1201'0' W.P.(C) No.565/2010, W.P.(C) No:598/2010, tr/V'P'(C) No.75412010, W.p'(C) No.1902 120t0, W'P'(C) No'227'4120L0 W.P.(C) No.39 tsl2ot}, W.p.(C) No'423/2010'' iW'P'(C) No.756i2010,w.P.(c)No.83212010,w.P.(c)No'75212010' VV.P'(C) No.793/2010, W.P.(C) No.1384 |2010, iW.P.(C) No.13B6 ]2O:rO, w.P.(c) No.205 LI}OIO, W.P.(C) No.4905 12010 and W.p.(C) Nb.3339 I2O:rO are allowed 'and the imiOuOned orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal wftich are challenged in the 'said writ petitions are :et aside ?nd the respective Transferied Petition or Original App.lication are dismissed. t+9. There shall no orders as. to costs' be :1 JUDGE jtJDGE I\{.JGUST L0, 20LO inm 't I I I' li .l I I t I 'I I i I i i t' I I II I I I W.P.(C) No.I4O27 /2009 & Connected Matters P,age 27 of 27