DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION versus MOOL CHAND
Since the VRS Scheme dated 13.12.1995 specifically excluded pension for employees opting under it, the respondent is not entitled to pension in addition to VRS benefits.
Source-derived case information.
- Parties
- Appellant: Delhi Transport Corporation; Respondent: Mool Chand
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 02 December 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Final Judgment of the Delhi High Court Dated 06.11.2001
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed, High Court judgment set aside.
- Legal Topics
- Voluntary Retirement Scheme, Pension
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Delhi Transport Corporation
Appellant
Mool Chand
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Final Judgment of the Delhi High Court Dated 06.11.2001
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether employees opting for the Voluntary Retirement Scheme of 13.12.1995 are entitled to pension in addition to VRS benefits
Ratio Decidendi
Since the VRS Scheme dated 13.12.1995 specifically excluded pension for employees opting under it, the respondent is not entitled to pension in addition to VRS benefits.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed, High Court judgment set aside.
Orders
- High Court judgment dated 06.11.2001 is set aside.
- Appeal (Civil Appeal No. 7258 of 2002) is allowed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
52 paragraphs
·~
,.
i
. [2008] 16 S.C.R. 1073
DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION v. MOOL CHAND (Civil Appeal No. 7258 of 2002)
DECEMBER 2, 2008
A
B
[MARKANDEY KAT JU AND AFT AB ALAM, JJ.]
Service Law:
Voluntary Retirement Scheme - Providing that c
employees opting for the Scheme would not be entitled to pensiqn - High Court holding that the employee would get pension in addition to VRS benefits - HELD: Judgment of High Court is erroneous and is set aside.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.
7258 of 2002.
)--
)
From the final Judgment dated 6.11.2001 of the High Court
of Delhi at New Delhi in LP.A. No. 62 of 2001.
WITH
Civil Appeal Nos. 2301, 2302 of 2007.
D
E
S.B. Sanyal, A. Subhashini, Sunil Dalal, Jay Kishore Singh (for Subramonium Prasad), B.D. Sharma, Naresh Kaushik and p Arnita Kalkal (for Lalita Kaushik) for the appearing parties.
The following Order of the Court was delivered:
ORDER
.......... ,'-*
1. This Appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the High Court dated 06th November, 2001. It appears that there was a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (for short 'VRS') in the Delhi Transport Corporation, hereinafter
1073
G
H
1074
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2008] 16 S.C.R.
A
referred to as the 'Corporation', in 1993 which contained a provision for pension. The respondent herein did not apply under that VRS Scheme:
f.
8
2. Subsequently, the Corporation framed a new Scheme dated 13.12.1995 in which it was specifically stated that those employees who opt for VRS under the new Scheme will not get pension. Respondent, admittedly, applied under this scheme.
3. Since, there was a specific provision in the VRS Scheme dated 13.12.1995, we fail to see how the High Court C has held that the respondent will get pension in addition-to VRS
benefits.
D
E
4. In view of above, we find that the impugned judgment
of the High Court is erroneous and it is hereby set aside.
5. The Appeal is allowed accordingly. No Order as to
costs.
Civil Appeal Nos.2301/2007 and 2302/2007
(
6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant in these appeals has stated that in view of the earlier order of this Court dated 12th March, 2007. passed in Special Leave Petition(C)No.4135 of 2007, these appeals may be dismissed. We order accordingly.
F R.P.
Appeals disposed of .
.J , .