LI Network
Published on: January 17, 2024 at 12:45 IST
The Tripura High Court has ruled in favor of an employee who sought retirement benefits under the old pension scheme. The court emphasized that the deed of variance would not be applied retrospectively.
The petitioner, who commenced employment as a Research Officer (Engineering) in 1987 under the Tripura State Council for Science & Technology, had approached the Court seeking entitlement to retirement benefits.
Justice S. Datta Purkayastha, presiding over the Single Bench, declared that the post-retirement benefits for the petitioner would be governed by the LICI Linked Terminal Benefit Scheme introduced from January 1, 2016.
The Court affirmed that the Deed of Variance would not impact the petitioner’s entitlement, rendering a letter dated March 18, 2023, ineffective.
The Court acknowledged the employee’s legitimate expectation to be governed by the old scheme, as he had opted for it during his service.
Background of the Case:
The petitioner, who was later promoted to Principal Scientific Officer (Space Application) in 2012, retired in 2019. A resolution passed in 2015 by the State Council’s Executive Committee led to the creation of a Trust to manage the LICI Linked Defined Benefit Pension Scheme from 2016. The employee opted for the Defined Benefit Pension Scheme, discontinuing the EPF Pension Scheme.
Post-retirement, the petitioner alleged that he did not receive the full benefits outlined in the Deed of Trust or the defined schemes of LICI. Despite initiating separate proceedings challenging departmental actions and the discontinuation of the old pension scheme, the petitioner faced non-compliance with the High Court’s directives.
The Joint Member Secretary informed the employee about a deed of variance executed to provide retirement benefits at par with State Government employees. Dissatisfied, the petitioner approached the High Court again.
Court’s Decision:
The High Court, citing the doctrine of “Legitimate Expectation” from administrative law, stressed that the petitioner had a legitimate expectation to be governed by the original scheme.
It held that the Deed of Variance could not be applied retrospectively, especially considering the financial benefits provided to other employees under the previous scheme.
Referring to the Supreme Court’s judgment in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Tata Communications Ltd., the Court reiterated that government circulars or orders could not have retrospective effect. Consequently, the High Court granted the writ petition, directing the respondents to make payment of all post-retirement benefits to the petitioner as per the old scheme within eight weeks.
Case Title: Nataraj Datta v. The State of Tripura
