Writ Petition No. 27638 of 2018 · The High Court · 2022

“The controversy involved in these matters pertains to the payment of arrears of pension with effect from 2006 onwards. Various arguments and counter arguments have been made. The grievance of the petitioner basically is for payment of arrears on account of 6th Pay Commission from 01.01.2006 to 31.01.2018 though he has been paid with effect from 01.02.2018 onwards. 2. The contention of the respondents is that the petitioner in his earlier employment though had got the pension commuted but owing to the revision has been granted 1/3rd of pension from 2006 onwards, Rs.9,000/- and odd amount, i.e., double benefit. 3. I am of the view that this controversy cannot be decided as is a disputed question with regard to the calculation of amount and cannot be adjudicated by this Court at this stage of the time, since the parties are ad idem, on the consensus, I direct the Deputy WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -11- Director (DT), Office of the Deputy Director, Branch Office - Kochi, Golden Jubilee Road, Kaloor, Kochi – 682 017 to hear the parties with regard to the calculations of the pension particularly considering the fact that the petitioner had already been paid the arrears with effect from 01.02.2018. The veracity whether the petitioner is entitled to amount with effect from 01.01.2006 would be in the domain of this Court, but as far as the calculation whether it amounts to double benefit or not would be taken into consideration by the officer appointed. The officer appointed shall afford opportunity to both the parties and give them sufficient opportunity of hearing. A period of two months is granted for the aforementioned Officer to look into the matter. The Deputy Director is also at liberty to conduct the hearing through virtual mode also subject to the situation at the relevant point of time.”

3. In pursuance to the above mentioned order, Deputy Director (DT)II, Indian Audit and Accounts Department, Office of the Principal Director of Audit (Central), Chennai, has submitted a report, which reads thus:- CE/II/12-13/HC/2021-22 Date:24 September 2021 To The Registrar General Hon’ble High Court of Kerala, Marine Drive, Kochi, Ernakulam, Kerala – 682031 WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -12- Sir, Sub: Appointment of Dy.Director (DT)II as hearing authority for determination of pension. Ref: Hon’ble High Court of Kerala Order dated 9 th July 2021 in W.P (C)No.27638 of 2018 & 7893 of 2019 Kind attention is invited to the reference cited, wherein the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala had appointed the Deputy Director (DT) II as hearing authority “Dr.T.V.Gopalan Vs. Union of India & Others” (Writ Petition No.27638 of 2018 & 7893 of 2019). In compliance with the orders of the Hon’ble High Court, a virtual hearing was conducted with both the parties on 6th September 2021. The records produced by the parties concerned were thoroughly examined in the light of the relevant Government of India Office Memorandums/Orders issued from time to time. The records produced and views expressed by the parties concerned, were taken into consideration while deciding the issue. Accordingly, a detailed report is submitted before the Hon’ble High Court. Yours faithfully Deputy Director (DT)II

4. As per the report, petitioner is entitled to the benefits as sought for, and it would not amount to double benefit to the petitioner. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to pay the arrears of pension strictly as per the WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -13- observations of the Controller of Audit General. The writ petition is allowed accordingly.”

4. The aforementioned order was assailed before the Writ Court in Writ Appeal bearing Nos.454/2022 and 461/2022. The Division Bench, vide judgment dated

07.07.2022 dismissed both the appeals, with the following findings: “6. Based on the report dated 24/09/2021 filed by the aforementioned officer, the writ petition has been allowed and the respondents have been directed to pay the arrears of pension as per the observations of the Controller of Audit General.

7. The grievance of respondents 2 and 3 is that the report relied on by the Single Judge is incorrect, which has been prepared without taking into consideration the various OMs in Appendix 7 of the CCS(Pension) Rules, which govern the pro-rata retirement benefits in case of permanent absorption. The Findings in the report are also not in consonance with the instructions issued by the 1st respondent Ministry and hence based on an erroneous report, the reliefs prayed for ought not to have been granted, goes the argument.

8. The learned Single Judge has never WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -14- gone into the merits of the report. Sitting in appeal, we also cannot go into the merits of the report or decide whether the findings in the report are right or wrong. If the report is incorrect as contended, the 2nd and 3rd respondents are at liberty to challenge the same before the appropriate forum/authority concerned. Therefore no interference into the impugned judgment is called for. In the result, the writ appeal is dismissed, reserving the liberty to the appellants (respondents 2 and 3) to challenge the report dated 24/09/2021 of the Deputy Director (DT) II, Indian Audit and Accounts Department, Office of the Principal Director of Audit (Central), Chennai, before appropriate forum/authority. All interlocutory Applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.”

5. Based upon the aforementioned observations, petitioner filed the present writ petition claiming following reliefs: “i. Call for the records leading to the issuance of Exhibit P21 report and quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction. WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -15- ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the 2nd respondent to determine whether Exhibit P13 OM is applicable in the case of pensioners who are governed by Appendix-7 of CCS(Pension) Rules. iii. Declare that granting the benefit of double pension to one group who chose pro rata retirement benefits from the previous service under the OMs given in Appendix 7 is discriminatory to the other class of government servants who chose to combine their services when option was given. iv. Grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

6. The grievances of the petitioner has already been reflected in the order dated 16.12.2021, extracted above; therefore, it would be improper for this Court to repeat the facts again for adjudication of the controversy. The first question which arises for consideration is, even if the liberty is granted, whether the writ petition challenging the report Ext.P21 would be maintainable as the petitioner had a chance to challenge the report when WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -16- it was submitted in this Court by applying the doctrine of estoppel/acquiesce. Whether the writ petition would be maintainable in the absence of challenge to the order dated 06.04.2016 Ext.P13 in W.P©.27652/22, whereby Ministry of Personnel, PG & Pensions Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare, New Delhi, vide order dated 06.04.2016 ordered that the pension of the Government servants retired and retiring on or before

01.01.2006 had been delinked from the qualifying service of thirty-three(33) years and it was decided that the revised consolidated pension of 32,000 pensioners shall not be lower than 50% of the minimum of the pay in the Pay Band and grade pay (wherever applicable), corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale as per the fitment table without pro-rata reduction of pension even if they had qualifying service of less than thirty three(33) years at the time of retirement and arrears of revised pension would be payable with effect from 01.01.2006. All the disbursing officers and banks were advised to prominently display the orders on their notice boards for WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -17- the benefit of the pensioners.

7. Petitioners in the previous writ petitions and in the contempt petitions, respondent No.4 in the present writ petition, Dr.T.V.Gopalan had rendered twenty two(22) years and six months of service in Central Power Research Institute (CPRI), Bangalore and thereafter joined Regional Engineering College, Kozhikode (CREC) on 22.05.1990. CREC, at that time, was an autonomous educational institution under the administrative control of the Government of Kerala and was funded jointly by both Central Government and State Government. In the year 2002-2003 it was taken over by the Central Government and known as National Institute of Technology, Calicut (NITC).

8. Petitioner joined CREC on permanent absorption basis as per the order of the Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare dated 31.03.1987 and Department of Personal Administrative Reforms dated

29.08.1984. It is a matter of record that with the concurrence of Central Government, pension/pay orders WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -18- applicable to Central Government employees were also extended to the employees of NITC. As per the terms and conditions of the appointment communicated to the Principal, CREC, Kozhikode dated 13.11.1990 by the CPRI, the petitioner was entitled to all the benefits admissible to the corresponding employees of CREC. Petitioner retired on 30.06.2005. At the relevant point of time, 5th Central Pay Commission Pension was applicable. Accordingly, the NITC worked out his pension for his qualifying service of fifteen(15) years i.e., pro rata pension for the service in NITC. Later, during the period of 6th Central Pay Commission, Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare, Culcutta, the Government of India introduced a major change in calculation of pension vide order dated 06.04.2016 and as per the aforementioned decision, even if the qualifying service of a retiree was less than maximum of thirty three(33) years, pension will be 50% of the last pay and average emoluments. In compliance of the said order, NITC revised the pension of the petitioner with effect WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -19- from 01.01.2006 vide order dated 13.03.2018.

9. After the disposal of the writ petitions aforementioned, two contempt petitions are filed. The learned counsel representing the alleged contemnors sought time in the contempt petitions on the ground that the order of the Single Bench of this Court dated

16.12.2021 had been assailed in writ appeal. In this view of the matter contempt petitions were adjourned.

10. Mr.Shyam Padman, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the report is not in consonance with the instructions issued by the Union of India, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions and Human Resources Development, Government of India as with regard to remark Nos.(1) and (2) the Deputy Director(DT) appreciated the terms and conditions of the appointment of the petitioner in CREC which is of permanent absorption, but in respect of remark No.3, there were separate instructions issued by respondent No.2 Ministry for handling the mobility of personnel WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -20- among Central Government Department and autonomous bodies and vice-versa (Appendix 7 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972) and the order dated 06.04.2016 extending the benefit of de-linking of pension from the requirement of thirty three(33) years) was not an instruction issued thereunder, (Appendix 7). Respondent No.2, Ministry is required to issue clarification on the extension of OM to the pensioners for their subsequent service. Pensionary benefits available to 4th respondent should not exceed the maximum benefits available when both the services were combined. Rule 18(3), the pari materia provision under the CCS (Pension) Rules provides the methodology to reckon the benefit admissible in the subsequent service when a Government Servant is retained the benefits received from his earlier service. Respondent No.2 is the sole authority to issue the clarification/explanation in the matters regarding pension under CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and Appendix

11. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -21- and appraised the paper books and of the view that there is no force and merit.

12. On perusal of the observations of the Division Bench, it is discerned that the order of the Single Bench has been upheld but with observation that the respondents and the petitioner were not given an option to lay challenge. With all humility at my command, I must observe that the order marking the case to the Deputy Director to examine the applicability of the Rules and the period therefrom was passed on 09.07.2021 and the report is of 24.09.2021. The writ petitions were disposed of on 16.12.2021. It is not the case of the petitioner either in the writ appeal before the Division Bench or in the subsequent writ petition that they were not supplied opportunity or any explanation has come forth the circumstances preventing them not to file any objections or the manner in which it has been done by filing a separate writ petition. Law of estoppel/acquiescence is no longer res integra. If a person omits to file the objections to the report resulting WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -22- into passing of the order, cannot be permitted to blow hot and cold at a later point of time.

13. It is the conceded position on record that the previous order dated 06.04.2016 giving the benefits and do away with thirty three(33) years of service has attained the finality. In the present writ petition, petitioner has intentionally not placed on record the order dated 13.03.2018, of which the petitioner had sought implementation. It was attached as Ext.P5 in the Writ Petition (C) No.7893 of 2019. For the sake of convenience, the same is extracted hereunder: “F.No.PG/1848/2005 National Institute of Technology Calicut (Ministry of HRD, Government of India) NIT Campus (P.O) Kozhikode, Kerala 673601 Dated:13.3.18 Office Order Sub:Revision of Pension/Family Pension of pre- 2006 Faculty Pensioners/Family Pensioners with effect from 01.01.2006 Ref: 1. Pension Payment Order No.312

2. GOI No.38/37/08/-P&PW(A) dated 6th April, 2016. With reference cited (2), the Pension/Family WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -23- Pension or both in respect of Dr.T.V.Gopalan, Retired Professor has been revised as follows:- is revised to Superannuation Pension Rs.25,445/-(Rupees Twenty Five thousand Four hundred and forty five only) instead of Rs.11,566/- (Rupees Eleven thousand Five hundred and Sixty Six Only). As per the GO cited above Pension is revised on the basis of qualifying service of pensioner there is no change in the Family pension. Sd/- Registrar To, Dr.T.V.GOPALAN “TRICHAMBARAM(H)” SUBSTATION ROAD, CHEVAYUR, CALICUT 673017 Copy to:1.Individual Pension file”

14. The aforementioned order has not been challenged or assailed, rather was passed on the basis of the order dated 06.04.2016 Ext.P4 in W.P.© No.7893 of

2019. The same reads as under: “No. 38/37/08-P&PW (A) Government of India Ministry of Personnel, PG & Pensions Department of Pension & Pensioners' Welfare 3 Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan Khan Market, New Delhi-110 003 Dated the 06 April, 2016 OFFICE MEMORANDUM WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -24- Sub: Revision of pension of pre-2006 pensioners-delinking of revised pension from qualifying service of 33 years. The undersigned is directed to say that as per Para 4.2 of this Department's OM of even number dated 1.9.2008 relating to revision of pension of pre-2006 pensioners w.e.f. 1.1.2006, the revised pension w.e.f. 1.1.2006, in no case, shall be lower then 50% of the sum of the minimum of pay in the pay band and the grade pay thereon corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired. A clarification was issued vide DoP&PW OM of even number dated 3.10.2008 that the pension calculated at 50% of the minimum of pay in the pay band plus grade pay would be calculated at the minimum of the pay in the pay band (irrespective of the pre-revised scale of pay) plus the grade pay corresponding to the pre- revised pay scale.

2. Several petitions were filed in the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi inter alia claiming that the revised pension of the pre-2006 pensioners should not be less than 50% of the minimum of the pay band + grade pay, corresponding to the pre- revised pay scale from which pensioner had retired, as arrived at with reference to the fitment tables annexed to Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure OM No. 1/1/2008-IC dated 30 August, 2008 Hon'ble CAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi vide its common order dated 1.11.2011 in OA No.655/2010 and three other connected OAs directed to re-fix the pension of all pre-2006 retirees w.e.f 1.1.2006 based on the Resolution dated 29.8.2008 of the Department of Pension & Pensioners' Welfare and in the light of the observations of Hon'ble CAT in that order.

3. Orders were issued vide this Department's OM of even number dated 28.1.2013 for WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -25- stepping up of pension of pre-2006 pensioners w.ef. 24.9.2012 to 50% of the minimum of pay in the pay band and grade pay corresponding to pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner retired. Para 5 of this OM provides that in case the consolidated pension/family pension calculated as per para 4.1 of O.M. No.38/37/08- P&PW (A) dated 1.9.2008 is higher than the pension/family pension calculated in the manner indicated in the OM. dated 28.1.2013, the same (higher consolidated pension/family pension) will continue to be treated as basic pension family pension.

4. Subsequently, in compliance of the order dated 1.11.2011 of the Hon'ble CAT, Principal Bench in OA No. 655/2010, order dated 29.4.2013 of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in WP (C) No. 1535/2012 and order dated 17.3.2015 of Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (C) No. 36148/2013, order were issued vide this Department's OM of even number dated 30.7.2015 that the pension/family pension of all pre- 2006 pensioners/family pensioners may be revised in accordance with this Department's O.M. No.38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 28.1.2013 with effect from 1.1.2006 instead of 24.9.2012.

5. In accordance with the order issued in implementation of the recommendation of the 6 CPC, the pension of Government servants retired/retiring on or after 1.1.2006 has been delinked from qualifying service of 33 years. In OA No. 715/2012 filed by Shri. M.O. Inasu, a pre-2006 pensioner, Hon'ble CAT, Ernakulam Bench, vide its order dated 16.8.2013 directed that the revised pension w.ef. 1.1.2006 under WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -26- para 4.2 of OM dated 1.9.2008 would not be reduced based on the qualifying service of less than 33 years. The appeals filed by Department of Revenue in the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala and in the Hon'ble Supreme Court have also been dismissed. Similar orders have been passed by Hon'ble CAT/High Court in several other cases also.

6. The matter has been examined in consultation with the Ministry of Finance (Department of Expenditure). It has now been decided that the revised consolidated pension of pre-2006 pensioners shall not be lower than 50% of the minimum of the pay in the Pay Band and the grade pay (wherever applicable) corresponding to the pre- revised pay scale as per fitment table without pro-rata reduction of pension even if they had qualifying service of less than 33 years at the time of retirement. Accordingly, Para 5 of this Department's OM of even number dated 28.1.2013 would stand deleted. The arrears of revised pension would be payable with effect from 1.1.2006.

7. Ministry of Agriculture, etc. are requested to bring the contents of these orders to the notice of Controller of Accounts/Pay and Accounts Officers and Attached and Subordinate Offices under them for revising the pension of all those pre- 2006 pensioners who had rendered less than 33 years of qualifying service at the time of retirement in the manner as indicated above on top priority. Revised Pension Payment Orders in all these cases may also be issued immediately.

8. All pension disbursing offices/banks are also advised to prominently display these orders on their notice boards for the benefit of pensioners. This issues with the approval of Ministry 9. of Finance, Deptt. of Expenditure vide ID Note No. 2(9)EV/2015, dated 15.3.2016. WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -27-

10. Hindi version will follow. Sd/- (Seema Gupta) Deputy Secretary to the Government of India To

1. All Ministries/Departments of Government of India. (as per standard mailing list). 2. All SCOVA Members 3. All identified Pensioners Association Copy to (i) NIC Cell for uploading on the website of the Department. (ii) AD (OL), DoPPW for Hindi Version”

15. Both the above orders have attained finality. In the absence of any challenge to the said orders at any point of time petitioner cannot be permitted to go behind the order and raise a different plea than the one as raised earlier.

16. Appendix 7 of the CCS Pension Rules, stipulates, “a Government Servant shall not own two pensions in the same service or the posts at the same time or by same continuous service”. The service of the petitioner in the instant case was not in the same service but in two different autonomous bodies. WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -28-

17. Rule 18(3) is also not applicable in view of the provisions in Appendix 7. It is worth to note that the pension eligibility of the absorbed pensioner was dealt with in the order dated 15.09.2008 and 23.06.2007 of the Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare, wherein there is no mention of combining of both the pensions i.e., one from the absorption pension and second from new employer. If there was any doubt the NITC should have referred the matter before issuing the pension revision order dated 13.03.2018 as extracted above. Respondent No.4 is getting two pensions from two different spells of services based upon his option for pro rata retirement benefit for the services rendered under the CPRI. Relevant portion of Ext.P10 letter dated

13.11.1990 of the CPRI is extracted hereinbelow: “--------- (2) In case he opts in favour of sub-clause (1) of clause (1) above, he will be eligible to draw pension in accordance with the rules of the Calicut Regional Engineering College for the combined service under Central Power WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -29- Research Institute that under the Calicut Regional Engineering College on his final retirement from that body. If he resigns from service of the Calicut Regional Engineering College his resignation will be treated as resignation from Central Power Research Institute vice entailing forfeiture of past services including that under the Central Power Research Institute and consequent loss of pensionary benefits for the combined service. (3) (a) In case he opts in favour of sub-clause (ii) of clause (1), he will have further option which will also have to be exercised along with the option referred to in clause (1) above - (i) either to receive pro rata monthly pension. (ii) or to receive a lump sum amount in lieu of monthly pension. In case no specific option is indicated by him in this behalf, he will be deemed to have opted in favour of sub- clause (1) of this clause. (3) (b) In the event of his option in favour of sub- clause (1) of clause (3) (a) he will draw pro rata pension and retirement gratuity for the service rendered under the Central Power Research Institute. He will also be eligible to commute up to 1/3rd of his pension. WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -30- (3) (c) If he opts in favour of sub-clause (ii) of clause 3 (a), he will receive lump sum amount in lieu of pro rata pension and retirement gratuity. The lump sum amount will be calculated by applying the commutation table under the c.c.s. (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1981, applicable on the date of his cessation of service under the Central Power Research Institute. The commutation shall be subject to medical examination. The pension so commuted shall not be restored at any stage. (3) (d) Calculation of pro rata retirement benefits:- The retirement gratuity and pro rata pension will be calculated in accordance with the central civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972. (NOTE: The benefit of the scheme of voluntary retirement issued vide Department of Personnel Administrative Reform, O.M. No.25013/71/77-Estt. (A) dated the 26th August, 1977, as embodied in Rule 48-A of the C.C.S. (Pension) Rules, 1972, is not admissible in this case). (3) (e) Date of payment of pro rata retirement benefits:- The amount of retirement gratuity and lump sum amount in lieu of pension wherever opted will be payable immediately after the date of his permanent absorption. The amount of pro rata monthly pension wherever applicable will also be payable from the date following the date WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -31- of cessation of service under the Central Power Research Institute. (3) (f) Limitation as to the total amount of gratuity :- The total gratuity admissible in respect of the service rendered under the Central Power Research Institute and that under the Calicut Regional Engineering College shall not exceed the amount that would have been admissible had Dr.T.V.Gopalan continued in Central Power Research Institute and retired on the same pay which he drew on retirement from Central Power Research Institute. (3)(g) Effect of Liberalisation of Pension/gratuity Rules after absorption:- Any further liberalisation of pension/ gratuity rules decided upon by Government of India in respect of its officers after the permanent absorption of Dr.T.V.Gopalan in Calicut Regional Engineering College will NOT be extended to him in case Dr.T.V.Gopalan has opted to receive a lump sum amount in lieu of pension on absorption and the permanent absorption has taken place from a date prior to the date from which rationalisation/liberalisation in pension rules has been given effect to by the central Government.

4. Family Pension admissible from one source only:- (1) On his permanent absorption in Calicut Regional Engineering College, the WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -32- family of Dr.T.V. Gopalan will be eligible for family pension as admissible under the Central Power Research Institute only if there is no family pension scheme in the Calicut Regional Engineering College or only if he is not eligible to join the family pension scheme available in the Calicut Regional Engineering College or only if he is specifically exempted by the Central Provident Fund Commissioner on the basis of a formal application submitted by him through the Calicut Regional Engineering College from the coverage of the family pension scheme of the Calicut Regional Engineering College. In all other situations, he will be compulsorily covered by the family pension scheme of the Calicut Regional Engineering College. (ii) The liability of the Central Power Research Institute in regard to the amount of family pension will be frozen as on the date of permanent absorption in the Calicut Regional Engineering College and will be calculated with reference to the pay drawn and the rules in force on the date of permanent absorption. The eligibility of family members to receive family pension will be regulated in accordance with the Central Government Rules/Orders in force at the relevant time. (iii) Family pension will be admissible only from one source i.e, either from the Central Power WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -33- Research Institute or from the Calicut Regional Engineering college and not from both. NOTE: The family will not be eligible for any benefit under the family pension scheme of the Central Power Research Institute if he is not permanent and also does not have a qualifying service of not less than ten years, on the date of absorption.

5. Fixation of pay on absorption: Dr.T.V.Gopalan will be free to negotiate his emoluments with autonomous body. On his absorption he will be at par with other employees of the autonomous body and will be governed by the rules of the autonomous body in all respects.

6. Leave:- Dr.T.V.Gopalan will be entitled to an encashment of earned leave to his credit at the time of acceptance of his resignation from Central Power Research Institute service subject to a maximum of 240 days. Half pay leave will stand forfeited.

7. Benefits after permanent absorption- For the period of service rendered by Dr.T.V.Gopalan in Calicut Regional Engineering College from the date of permanent absorption he will be entitled to all the benefits admissible to the corresponding employees of the said organisation and continue to be governed by its rules in all respects. WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -34-

8. Provident Fund:- The amount of subscription together with interest thereon standing to the credit of Dr.T.V.Gopalan in the General Provident Fund account will be transferred to his new Provident Fund Account under the Calicut Regional Engineering College with its consent. In case the autonomous body does not have Provident Fund Scheme or the Provident Fund Scheme of autonomous body does not provide for acceptance of balance from other Provident Funds, the G.P.F. balance shall be paid to Dr.T.V.Gopalan in cash. Once such a transfer of Provident Fund Balance has taken place, Dr.T.V.Gopalan will be subject to the Provident Fund Rules of the Calicut Regional Engineering College and not of the Provident Fund Rules of the Central Power Research Institute.

9. Extra-ordinary leave sanctioned to him w.e.f.

22.5.90 stands cancelled.”

18. There is no doubt in the mind of the Court that the report of the Deputy Director(DT) II dated

24.09.2021 was incorrect. Writ petition sans merit. Accordingly dismissed. Contempt petitions are closed. Petitioner in W.P©.27652/22 is directed to comply with the judgment WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -35- of this Court dated 16.12.2021 within a period of three months, failing which Respondent No.4 (petitioner in the contempt cases) will be at liberty to revive the Contempt Petitions. Sd/- AMIT RAWAL JUDGE WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -36- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27652/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 Exhibit P2 Exhibit P3 Exhibit P4 Exhibit P5 Exhibit P6 Exhibit P7 Exhibit P8 Exhibit P9 Exhibit P10 Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION NO.F-35- 1/2002-TS.III DATED 14.05.2003 TRUE COPY OF OFFICE MEMORANDUM NO.F.20-46/2003-TS-III DATED 09.06.2004 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT WEB PAGE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT WEB PAGE (SHOWING THE LIST OF 19 OMS) OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TRUE COPY OF OM NO.28/10/84-PENSION UNIT DATED 29.08.1984 TRUE COPY OF OM NO.28/10/84-PU-VOLUME- I DATED 12.09.1985 TRUE COPY OF OM NO. 28(10)/84- P&PW.VOL.II DATED 07.02.1986 TRUE COPY OF OM NO.4(12)/85-P&PW DATED 31.03.1987 TRUE COPY OF THE RELIEVING ORDER DATED 17.05.1990 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT FROM CPRI TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVAL LETTER NO.5/38/78-ADMN. DATED 13.11.1990 ISSUED BY CPRI, BANGALORE TRUE COPY OF LETTER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT NO.TVG/NOV./90 DATED 16.11.1990 TO THE DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE COMMUNICATING HIS OPTIONS WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -37- Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT WEB PAGE (SHOWING THE LIST OF 59 OMS UNDER '6TH CPC') OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF OM NO.38/37/08-P&PW(A) DATED 06.04.2016 Exhibit P14 Exhibit P15 Exhibit P16 TRUE COPY OF MHRD COMMUNICATION NO. F.NO.40-10/2017-TS.III (PT) DATED 20.09.2017 TRUE COPY OF EMAIL COMMUNICATION DATED 31.10.2018 SENT BY THE RESPONDENT INSTITUTE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 07.11.2018 RECEIVED FROM 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P17 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.PG/1848/2005 DATED 24.01.2019 Exhibit P18 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.CPRI/ACCTS-I/PENSION/18-19 DATED 12.02.2019 Exhibit P19 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.F.40-18/2020- TS.III DATED 09.12.2020 Exhibit P20 Exhibit P21 Exhibit P22 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 09.07.2021 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN W.P.(C) NO.27638/2018 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT NO.CE/II/2- 13/HC/2021-22 DATED 24.09.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN W.P.(C)NO.27638/2018 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.12.2021 IN W.P.(C).NO.7893/2019 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -38- Exhibit P23 Exhibit P24 Exhibit P25 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.12.2021 IN W.P.(C) NO.27638/2018 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 07.07.2022 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN W.A.NO.454/2022 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 07.07.2022 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN W.A.NO.461/2022 WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -39- APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 703/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A Annexure B Annexure C TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P. (C)NO. 27638/2018 DATED 16-12-2021 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. TVG/1/DEC/2021 DATED 28-12-2021 FROM THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28-1-2022 WP(C).27652/22&COC.702/22&703/22 -40- APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 702/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A Annexure B Annexure C TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P. (C)NO. 7893/2019 DATED 16-12-2021 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. TVG/1/DEC/2021 DATED 28-12-2021 FROM THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28-1- 2022 FROM THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.