### Eligibility for Old Pension Scheme based on pre-2005 appointment process initiation must be decided via reasoned order.

The eight petitioners, employees under the Government of Bihar, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to place them under the Old Pension Scheme (OPS) rather than the New Pension Scheme (NPS/CPF).

They contended that their appointment process was initiated and the selection panels were prepared prior to the cutoff date of September 1, 2005.

The petitioners submitted representations to the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Jamui, who subsequently forwarded their claims along with an enquiry report to the Director-in-Chief, Health Services, vide a letter dated February 22, 2025.

Despite this recommendation, the State government had not taken a final decision on the matter.

1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to the benefit of the Old Pension Scheme based on the initiation of their recruitment process prior to September 1, 2005.

2. Whether the Director-in-Chief, Health Services, is obligated to pass a formal order on the recommendations forwarded by the subordinate district health authorities.

Finance Department’s Gazette notification (Memo No. 1206 dated 28.11.2023) and Finance Department Letter No. 48/2020 (Memo No. 368 dated 13.06.2024), which govern the transition of employees to the Old Pension Scheme.

The ratio laid down in Mahendra Mahto vs. State of Bihar Ors. (CWJC No. 13344 of 2024), which addressed similar grievances regarding pension scheme eligibility.

The court observed that the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Jamui, had already verified the petitioners' claims and recommended them for the Old Pension Scheme through an enquiry report submitted to the Director-in-Chief (Respondent No. 5).

The court found that Respondent No. 5 had failed to perform his administrative duty by keeping the matter pending.

The court reasoned that since the administrative machinery had already processed the facts and provided a recommendation, a time-bound direction was necessary to ensure that the Respondent applied the relevant Finance Department guidelines and judicial precedents—specifically the cutoff date logic—to reach a final determination.

The authority must consider Memo No. 368 dated 13.06.2024 and the judgment in Mahendra Mahto vs. State of Bihar when making the decision within 90 days of receipt of the court’s order.