Employees Bound by Pension Choice Due to 1987 Memo; Attempts to Switch to Provident Fund Invalid, Appeal Dismissed.

The court addressed the interpretation of the Office Memorandum dated 1.5.1987 concerning employees of the Bureau of Indian Standards and their choice between the Provident Fund Scheme and the Pension Scheme. Employees who failed to opt for the Pension Scheme by the deadline were automatically considered members of it, and any later attempts to revert to the Provident Fund Scheme were invalid. The Single Judge's decision to allow the writ petition was upheld, absolving the Union of India from financial liability. The Division Bench's modification was considered inappropriate, leading to the dismissal of the appeal without costs.

---

---

Issues involved: Interpretation of Office Memorandum dated 1.5.1987 regarding Provident Fund Scheme options for employees of Bureau of Indian Standards, applicability of Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, and legal consequences of employees not opting for Pension Scheme.

Interpretation of Office Memorandum dated 1.5.1987:
The judgment dealt with employees of Bureau of Indian Standards who were part of the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme. The Office Memorandum dated 1.5.1987 required employees to choose between the Provident Fund Scheme and the Pension Scheme. Despite clear instructions in the Memorandum, some employees did not exercise their option by the specified date.

Applicability of Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972:
The Regulation made by Bureau of Indian Standards stated that employees who had chosen the Provident Fund Scheme before the commencement of the Regulations would continue under that scheme. However, due to the legal fiction created by the Office Memorandum, employees who did not opt for the Pension Scheme were deemed to have switched to it.

Legal consequences of employees not opting for Pension Scheme:
The judgment clarified that employees who did not opt for the Pension Scheme by the specified date were deemed to have become members of the Pension Scheme. Therefore, any subsequent attempt to revert to the Provident Fund Scheme was deemed illegal. The Ministry of Finance's stance on the Pension Scheme's applicability was deemed incorrect, as two legal fictions had been created, resulting in employees being part of the Pension Scheme.

Conclusion:
The Single Judge correctly allowed the writ petition, absolving the Union of India from financial liability. The Division Bench's modification of the order was deemed inappropriate. The appeal was dismissed, with no costs awarded.

---