AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The present OA has been filed by the applicant seeking the following relief(s):-
“A. Call for records of the case;
B. Pass an order quashing and setting aside orders dated 01.11.2024 rejecting benefit of Old Pension System under Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1972 to the Applicant;
C. Issue a direction to the Respondents, directing to grant benefit of Old Pension System under Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1972 to the applicant and withdraw the National Pension System (NPS) and pass necessary consequential orders to implement Old Pension System in case of the Applicant;
D. Award costs to the applicant;
E. Pass any other or further order which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the issue involved in the present Original Application now stands settled by a subsequent D.O.P.T. OM, which has clarified the applicability of the Old Pension Scheme (OPS) to compassionate appointees who, though appointed on or after 01.01.2004, had submitted their applications for compassionate appointment prior to the said date or whose applications were pending as on that date. Learned counsel submits that, in view of the aforesaid clarification, such appointees are now eligible for coverage under the OPS in terms of the D.O.P.T. OM dated 22.06.2026. It is, therefore, submitted that the present Original Application may be decided in the light of the aforesaid OM.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondents, however, submits that a rejoinder has not been supplied to the respondents.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the relevant record has already been placed on record and further points out that the claim of the applicant was submitted on 19.11.2025, i.e. prior to the issuance of the latest D.O.P.T. OM referred to hereinabove.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
It is noticed that the impugned order has been passed by Respondent No. 2 with reference to the D.O.P.T. OM dated 25.06.2020.
On being queried as to whether the aforesaid OM dated 25.06.2020 continues to hold the field, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the same stood superseded by the subsequent D.O.P.T. OM dated 03.03.2023. It is, however, submitted that the said OM dealt with cases where appointments were made pursuant to an advertisement and did not specifically address cases of compassionate appointment, where no advertisement was involved.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although the OM dated 25.06.2020 stood superseded by the OM dated 03.03.2023, the issue concerning compassionate appointees appointed without any advertisement remained unclarified. According to him, the said issue has now been specifically clarified by the latest D.O.P.T. OM dated 22.06.2026.
In view of the rival submissions and the subsequent development in the form of the D.O.P.T. OM dated 22.06.2026, we are of the considered view that the matter requires reconsideration by the competent authority in the light of the aforesaid OM.
It is also noticed that the applicant is presently in service and has not yet commenced receiving pension. In the circumstances, it would be appropriate to remit the matter to Respondent No. 2 for consideration of the applicant's claim afresh, in accordance with law and in the light of the D.O.P.T. OM dated 22.06.2026.
Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. Respondent No. 2 is directed to consider and decide the applicant's claim afresh, keeping in view the observations made hereinabove and the D.O.P.T. OM dated 22.06.2026, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Needless to say, the competent authority shall consider the applicant's claim independently and strictly in accordance with the applicable rules, instructions and the aforesaid OM.
The Original Application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No order as to costs.