The absorbing employer must honor its binding commitment to provide past-service pensionary benefits.

In brief

The question

1. Whether the petitioner was entitled to the claimed pro-rata pension contribution, leave salary contribution and gratuity calculated with reference to his prior service from 16 March 1996, rather than only his service at NITA.

The court held

The Court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to pay the amounts claimed in the petition—pro-rata pension contribution of Rs.38,71,637, leave salary contribution of Rs.32,86,536 and gratuity of Rs.13,44,252—within three months, subject to deduction of any payments already made under those heads.

It also directed

The petition and any pending applications were disposed of.

01Facts

The petitioner joined the Tripura State Pollution Control Board (TSPCB) in 1996, moved to the National Institute of Technology Agartala (NITA) in 2011, and joined Maharaja Bir Bikram University in 2017.

p. 3

NITA’s memoranda dated 4 December 2012 and 23 July 2013 confirmed his absorption and stated that his prior service from 16 March 1996 to 11 August 2011 would count for leave and pensionary benefits, including gratuity.

pp. 16–18

In earlier proceedings, the High Court allowed the petitioner’s claims; the Division Bench dismissed NITA’s appeal, and the Supreme Court dismissed NITA’s special leave petition.

pp. 19–24

The petitioner later sought payment of the claimed pro-rata pension contribution, leave salary contribution and gratuity, asserting that NITA had calculated benefits only for his service at NITA.

pp. 8–9

NITA contended that payment depended on the petitioner supplying an authenticated statement of the capitalised value of pension and gratuity from his former employer.

pp. 14–15

02Issues

i.1. Whether the petitioner was entitled to the claimed pro-rata pension contribution, leave salary contribution and gratuity calculated with reference to his prior service from 16 March 1996, rather than only his service at NITA.

pp. 8–9, 24–25

ii.2. Whether NITA could withhold or limit payment on the ground that the petitioner had not supplied an authenticated statement of the capitalised value of pension and gratuity from TSPCB.

pp. 14–15, 24–25

03Law Applied

The Court relied on the petitioner’s service terms under the NITA memoranda, which provided for counting his past service for leave and pensionary benefits, including gratuity.

pp. 16–18

The earlier judgment applied the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, the CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972, Government of India Decision No. 5 below Rule 14 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, and the Office Memorandum dated 29 August 1984 concerning the capitalised value of pension and gratuity.

pp. 19–20

The Division Bench affirmed the earlier judgment, and the Supreme Court’s dismissal of NITA’s special leave petition left that judgment final.

pp. 21–24

The present Court treated the unchallenged memoranda and the final earlier judgments as governing the parties’ entitlement.

pp. 18–19, 24–25

04Reasoning

The Court found that the 2013 memorandum expressly recognised the petitioner’s service from 16 March 1996 to 11 August 2011 for pensionary and leave benefits, and that NITA had not challenged or rescinded that memorandum.

pp. 17–19

The entitlement had also been affirmed in the earlier writ petition and appeal, with the Supreme Court declining to interfere.

pp. 19–24

Against that background, NITA’s calculation based only on the petitioner’s NITA tenure did not give effect to the governing memoranda and final judgments.

pp. 8–9, 24–25

The Court rejected NITA’s reliance on the missing capitalised-value statement, reasoning that the requirement was inconsistent with the 2013 memorandum and that the TSPCB service did not carry the pension relied on by NITA.

p. 25