The Supreme Court on Thursday, August 20, 2026, dismissed a petition by a retired professor seeking pension benefits under the General Provident Fund-cum-Pension Scheme (GPF) instead of the Central Pension Fund Scheme (CPF) under which he had been covered throughout his service. According to reports from The Times of India, Upstox, and Mint, a bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S. Chandurkar upheld the Telangana High Court's order setting aside the Central Administrative Tribunal's ruling in the employee's favour. The court held that the petitioner could not challenge the terms of his regularisation after accepting retiral benefits under CPF. This ruling establishes a crucial precedent that a retired government employee cannot seek benefits of a pension scheme different from the one under which they were covered throughout their service and received retirement benefits. The court found "no reason, whatsoever, to exercise jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India" and dismissed the special leave petition.
The dispute has its roots in a career spanning nearly three decades, as reported by The Times of India, Upstox, and Mint. K. Suman Chandra was initially appointed as a Research Associate with NIRD on a contractual basis on November 12, 1984, and was covered under the CPF Scheme. His services were regularised with effect from November 7, 1985, and he was subsequently appointed as Assistant Director on March 9, 1992, Deputy Director on August 10, 1999, and Professor on May 1, 2007, all on contractual basis. His services as Professor were regularised through an office order dated May 4, 2012, with the order stipulating that regularisation would take effect from the date of the order itself and that services would continue to be governed by the existing CPF Scheme. The services of Chandra's colleague, Shyam Sunder Prasad Sharma, were regularised on the same date on identical terms.
Chandra retired from service on January 31, 2017, and was paid all retiral benefits on February 14, 2017, which included NIRD's contribution to the CPF amount besides his own contribution. According to The Times of India, Upstox, and Mint, after retirement, Chandra approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) seeking a declaration that NIRD's decision to continue him under the CPF Scheme instead of the GPF Scheme was illegal and contrary to the NIRD Rules of 2011. The CAT allowed his application on July 15, 2019, directing NIRD to permit him to come under the GPF Scheme from the date he was eligible, citing a similar application by colleague Shyam Sunder Prasad Sharma whose services were also regularised on May 4, 2012. However, the Supreme Court had already reversed the Sharma decision on February 28, 2023, holding that regularisation would operate from the date of the order and not from the date of initial appointment.
The Supreme Court noted that the petitioner's case was based on the same Office Order No. 98 dated May 4, 2012, by which services of academic staff were regularised, as reported by The Times of India, Upstox, and Mint. The court emphasized that the terms and conditions of regularisation included the order taking effect from the date of issuance and services being governed by the existing CPF Scheme. One of the key observations was on the timing of the challenge, noting that the petitioner had accepted the terms and conditions for regularisation of services on the post of Professor and raised his grievance post-retirement after accepting benefits under the CPF Scheme. The court found "no reason to exercise jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India" and dismissed the special leave petition. The judgment highlights that employees who accept regularisation on specified terms and receive benefits under a particular pension scheme cannot challenge those terms only after retirement. The ruling emphasizes the importance of understanding the terms attached to employment regularisation and retirement schemes before accepting them, as a pension or provident fund choice can have significant financial consequences after retirement.
