DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION vs SH. RAJINDER KUMAR MODI

Judgment text excerpt

$~47 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 2075/2019 & CM APPL. 9690/2019 DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION .....Petitioner Through: Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel with Mr. N. K. Singh, Ms. Laavanya Kaushik, Ms. Aliza Alam, Mr. Mohnish Sehrawat, Advs. versus SH. RAJINDER KUMAR MODI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Hari Kishan, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 28.03.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J. 1. This case is entirely covered by the judgment rendered by us in DTC v Anil Luthra1, though Ms. Ahlawat, appearing for the appellant-Delhi Transport Corporation2 has spared no efforts in attempting to distinguish the said decision. 2. The respondent had joined the services of the DTC on 19 November 1966. At that time, all employees of the DTC were covered by the Contributory Provident Fund3 scheme. On 27 1 2025 SCC OnLine Del 1650 2 “DTC” hereinafter 3 “CPF” hereinafter Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) 2075/2019 Page 1 of 6 Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR Signing Date:02.04.2025 19:12:01 November 1992, the DTC introduced a Pension Scheme in its organization. Para 3 of the Office Order dated 27 November 1992 permitted employees, if they so chose, to continue to remain under the CPF scheme of the DTC. However, the option was required to be exercised within a period of three months from that date, failing which para 9 of the Office Order ordained that they would automatically switch over to the newly introduced Pension Scheme. This period of three months got extended till 1995, as the new Pension Scheme had to be operationalized by the LIC, and there were certain hiccups in the process. 3. The respondent never opted to continue under the CPF scheme of the DTC. Nor did the respondent, at any point of time, state t