Regularization after the 01.01.2004 cut-off date constitutes fresh appointment, disqualifying employees from Old Pension Scheme benefits.

The appellants were initially appointed as casual/daily wage employees in Class III and IV posts at the Centre for Water Resources Studies (CWRS) in 1983–1984.

Their services were absorbed by Patna University via an office order dated 28.01.2004.

On the same day, the Bihar College of Engineering was taken over by the Central Government and rechristened as the National Institute of Technology (NIT), Patna.

Following prior litigation regarding their joining and salary, a compromise was reached before the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 03.03.2008 in SLP (Civil) No. 19811 of 2006. Under this settlement, the appellants were treated as NIT employees effective 28.01.2004, explicitly agreeing not to claim any monetary or other benefits for the period prior to that date.

In 2014, the NIT Registrar directed the appellants to enroll in the New Pension Scheme (NPS). The appellants challenged this, seeking the benefit of the Old Pension Scheme (OPS), but their writ petition was dismissed by the Single Judge on 29.11.2024.

1. Whether the appellants, having been absorbed into regular service on 28.01.2004, are entitled to the benefits of the Old Pension Scheme despite the implementation of the New Pension Scheme effective 01.01.2004.

2. Whether the appellants qualify for the exemption under Office Memorandum dated 04.11.2015 regarding the counting of past services for pensionary benefits.

3. Whether the compromise decree passed by the Supreme Court estops the appellants from claiming benefits prior to the date of their regular absorption.

The court primarily applied the New Pension Scheme (NPS) guidelines, which mandated that any employee joining government service on or after 01.01.2004 is covered by the NPS and not the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972.

It relied on the Office Memorandum (OM) dated 04.11.2015, which clarifies that only those employees who were in a "pensionable establishment" of the Central/State Government or autonomous bodies as of 31.12.2003 and subsequently appointed to All India Services with proper permission are covered under the OPS.

The court also applied the doctrine of estoppel and waiver arising from a voluntary settlement reached before the Supreme Court.

The court reasoned that while the appellants were working in an autonomous body on 31.12.2003, they were casual employees on a daily wage basis and thus did not belong to a "pensionable establishment".

Their regular absorption on 28.01.2004 constituted a "fresh appointment" in the eyes of the law, especially since the absorption letter specifically excluded benefits for past services.

The court noted that Clause 2(i) of the OM dated 04.11.2015 is restrictive and does not extend to casual workers regularized after the 01.01.2004 cutoff.

Furthermore, the court emphasized the binding nature of the 2008 Supreme Court compromise, wherein the appellants voluntarily waived all claims—monetary or otherwise—for the period prior to 28.01.2004.

The court distinguished the precedent Nagar Mahapalika, Kanpur v. Smt. Vibha Shukla, holding that regularization terms are governed by the specific offer and conditions accepted by the employee without demur.

The court held that the appellants are not entitled to the Old Pension Scheme because their regular service commenced after the 01.01.2004 cutoff and they were not in a pensionable establishment prior to that date.

Additionally, the court held that the appellants are legally bound by the terms of the settlement arrived at before the Supreme Court, which precluded any claims related to their service prior to 28.01.2004.