Vutla Subbarao v. The Commissioner Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & ORS.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Reserved on: 05.08.2025
Pronounced on: 02.09.2025 (1)+ W.P.(C) 3172/2019 BHARTI BAHUGUNA .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. S. Sunil, Adv.
versus KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN & ORS .....Respondents Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS Ms. Shubhra Parashar and Mr.
V. P. S. Charak, Advs. for UOI.
(2)+ W.P.(C) 2113/2020 DURGA SHIVA KUMAR & ORS.
.....Petitioners Through:
Mr. Anirudh Gupta, Adv.
versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS (3)+ W.P.(C) 2676/2020 & CM APPLs. 44100/2022 & 20317/2024 ANJALI DAS & ORS .....Petitioners Through:
Mr. K.K. Rai, Sr. Adv. with Mr.
S.K. Pandey, Mr. Anshul Rai, Ms. Sreshi Chatterjee, Mr. Rajan Parmar, Mr. Chandrasekhar A.
Chaualabbi and Mr. Awanish Kumar, Advs.
versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS .....Respondents Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS Dr. Amar Nath Gupta and Mr.
Santosh Kumar Sahu, Advs. for R-12, 14, 15 and 16.
(4)+ W.P.(C) 9479/2020 & CM APPL. 30500/2020 KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS versus MS. NISHA RANI .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Ravi Shankar Roy, Adv.
(5)+ W.P.(C) 10278/2020 & CM APPL. 32534/2020 KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS versus MS.RADHIKA JOSHI .....Respondent Through:
Mr. N. P. Joshi, Adv.
(6)+ W.P.(C) 11077/2020 & CM APPL. 34583/2020 KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS versus MRS.SHRADHA KASHYAP AND ORS .....Respondents Through:
Dr. Amar Nath Gupta and Mr.
Santosh Kumar Sahu, Advs.
(7)+ W.P.(C) 13002/2021 & CM APPL. 40981/2021 KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS versus SMT. SAROJ SHARMA .....Respondent
Through:
Mr.Suresh Sharma, Adv.
(8)+ W.P.(C) 10818/2022 SMT. INDU WAHI .....Petitioner Through:
Mr.Suresh Sharma, Adv.
versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS .....Respondents Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS Mr.Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC with Mr.Keshav Sehgal, Adv.
for UOI Ms.Avshreya Pratap Singh Rudy, SPC with Ms.Usha Jamnal, Ms.Harshita Chaturvedi, Advs. for UOI.
(9) + W.P.(C) 10408/2020 & CM APPL. 32971/2020 KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS versus MADAN LAL PANERI .....Respondent Through:
(10)+ W.P.(C) 748/2024 RITU SINGH .....Petitioner Through:
Dr.Amar Nath Gupta and Mr.Santosh Kumar, Advs.
versus THE COMMISSIONER KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS
(11)+ W.P.(C) 766/2024 VUTLA SUBBARAO .....Petitioner Through:
Dr.Amar Nath Gupta and Mr.Santosh Kumar, Advs.
versus THE COMMISSIONER KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS (12)+ W.P.(C) 8970/2024 GURVINDER KAUR SANDHU .....Petitioner Through:
Dr.Amar Nath Gupta and Mr.Santosh Kumar, Advs.
versus THE COMMISSIONER KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN & ANR.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS (13)+ W.P.(C) 14455/2021 MR. P. RAMACHANDRA REDDY & ANR. .....Petitioners Through:
Dr.Amar Nath Gupta and Mr.Santosh Kumar, Advs.
versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr.Ripudaman Bhardwaj, CGSC with Mr.Kushagra Kumar, Mr.Amit Kr. Rana, Advs. for UOI.
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS (14)+ W.P.(C) 1440/2022 BIJAY KUMAR JHA .....Petitioner Through:
Mr.Abhishek Singh, Adv.
versus
THE COMMISSIONER KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN & ANR.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS (15)+ W.P.(C) 11465/2023 BHUPINDER JIT SODHI & ANR.
.....Petitioners Through:
Dr.Amar Nath Gupta and Mr.Santosh Kumar, Advs.
versus THE COMMISSIONER KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN & ANR.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS (16)+ W.P.(C) 50/2024 USHA CHOUDHARY .....Petitioner Through:
Mr.Kripa Shankar Prasad and Mr.Harsh Jain, Advs.
versus KENDRIYA VIDYALAY SANGATHAN THROUGH COMMISSIONER & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS (17)+ W.P.(C) 12211/2023 SMT.RAKESH KUMARI .....Petitioner Through:
Mr.G. Natarajan, Adv.
versus THE COMMISSIONER KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN AND ANR.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS (18)+ W.P.(C) 12991/2023 & CM APPL. 51223/2023
CHANDRA CHOOR PANDEY .....Petitioner Through:
Ms.Anubha Dhulia, Adv.
versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS .....Respondents Through:
Ms.Nidhi Banga, SPC with Mr.Sandeep Chaudhary, Adv.
for R-1/UOI.
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS (19)+ W.P.(C) 16726/2023 ALOK KUMAR SHARMA & ANR.
.....Petitioners Through:
Dr.Amar Nath Gupta and Mr.Santosh Kumar, Advs.
versus THE COMMISSIONER KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS Mr. N. K. Bhatnagar, Mr. Arkam Khan and Ms.Tanushree Khandelwal, Advs.
(20)+ W.P.(C) 1373/2024 AMIN UDDIN KHAN AND ANOTHER .....Petitioners Through:
Ms.Anubha Dhulia, Adv.
versus THE COMMISSIONER, KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN AND ANR .....Respondents Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS (21)+ W.P.(C) 5718/2024 USHA KIRAN DHAMIJA .....Petitioner Through:
Dr.Amar Nath Gupta and
Mr.Santosh Kumar, Advs.
versus COMMISSIONER KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN & ANR.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS (22)+ W.P.(C) 10032/2024 M. SAROJINI NANCY BALA & ORS.
.....Petitioners Through:
Dr.Amar Nath Gupta and Mr.Santosh Kumar, Advs.
versus KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS Mr.Naginder Benipal, SPC with Mr.Ankit Siwach, Mr.Udit Vaghela and Mr.Arjun Baliyan, Advs.
(23)+ W.P.(C) 6557/2024 ANKARAJU SAVITHRI DEVI .....Petitioner Through:
Dr.Amar Nath Gupta and Mr.Santosh Kumar, Advs.
versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr.Kshitij Chhabra, SPC with Mr.Kamaldeep, Adv.
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS (24)+ W.P.(C) 9581/2024 & CM APPL. 39347/2024 SMT KRISHNA DAS & ORS.
.....Petitioners Through:
Dr.Amar Nath Gupta and
Mr.Santosh Kumar, Advs.
versus THE COMMISSIONER KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS (25)+ W.P.(C) 15137/2024 & CM APPL. 63528/2024 KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONER .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. U. N. Singh, Mr. D. N.
Singh and Ms.
Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advs. for KVS versus DIVYA TIWARI & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Dr.Amar Nath Gupta and Mr.Santosh Kumar Sahu, Advs.
Mr.Abhishek Tyagi and Mr.Rajiv Mitra, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR
J U D G M E N T
SHALINDER KAUR, J.
1.
The present batch of Writ Petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, have been filed to assail the final Orders passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as, μ7UL EXQDO¶
, either allowing or dismissing the Original Applications μ2$¶
filed by the employees of the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan μ.96¶
seeking grant of the
benefits under the General Provident Fund μ*3 F¶
-cum-Pension Scheme of the KVS.
2.
At the outset, we may note that the batch of petitions involve similar issues of law and arise from a common bundle of facts, though the dates of joining, retirement and nature of appointment are different, therefore, it is deemed appropriate to adjudicate them vide this common Judgment.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND 3.
The brief factual matrix, so far as is relevant to the present petitions, is that pursuant to the recommendations of the Fourth Central Pay Commission (CPC), Office Memorandum dated 01.05.1987 was issued by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance and Pension, Department of Pensions and 3HQVL RQHUV¶ Welfare, for switch-over of employees from the Contributory Provident Fund
μ&3)¶
Scheme to the Pension Scheme, according to which all CPF beneficiaries who were in service of the Central Government on 01.01.1986 and continue to remain in service, were deemed to have come over to the Pension Scheme unless, on or before 30.09.1987, they specifically opted to continue under the CPF Scheme. It was further stipulated that the CPF beneficiaries, who were in service on 01.01.1986 but have since retired and in whose case retirement benefits have also been paid under the CPF Scheme, will have an option to have their retirement benefits calculated under the Pension Scheme provided they opt for the same latest by 30.09.1987 and refund to the Government, the Government contribution to the
Contributory Provident Fund and the interest thereon, drawn by them at the time of settlement of the CPF Account. It was stipulated that the option once exercised, shall be final. The relevant extract from the said OM is as under:
3 All CPF beneficiaries, who were in service on 1.1.1986 and who are still in service on the date of issue of these orders will be deemed to have come over to the Pension Scheme.
3.2. The employees of the category mentioned above will, however, have an option to continue under the CPF Scheme, if they so desire. The option will have to be exercised and conveyed to the concerned Head of Office by 30.09.1987 in the form enclosed if the employees wish to continue under the CPF Scheme. If no option is received by the Head of Office by the above date the employees will be deemed to have come over to the Pension Scheme.
3.3. The CPF beneficiaries, who were in service on 1.1.1986 but have since retired and in whose case retirement benefits have also been paid under the CPF Scheme, will have an option to have their retirement benefits calculated under the Pension Scheme provided they refund to the Government, the Government contribution to the Contributory Provident Fund and the interest thereon, drawn by them at the time of settlement of the CPF Account. Such option shall be exercised latest by 30.09.1987.
xxxxx 3.6 The option once exercised shall be final. xxxxx 4.2 In the case of employees referred to above, who come over or are deemed to come over to the Pension Scheme, the Government's contribution to the CPF together with the interest thereon credited to the CPF Account
of the employee will be resumed by the Government. The employees contribution together with the interest thereon at his credit in the CPF Account will be transferred to the GPF Account to be allotted to him on his coming over to the Pension Scheme. ́ 4.
The KVS adopted the said OM dated 01.05.1987 vide OM No. 152-1/79-80/KVS/Budget/Part II dated 01.09.1988 and decided to implement it mutatis mutandis, except that the date of giving the option was stipulated as 31.01.1989. The relevant portions of the KVS OM dated 01.09.1988 reads as under:
3,Q the 51st Meeting of the Board of Governors of the Kendriya Vidyaiaya Sangathan heid on 31st May, 1988, it was approved that Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan will, implement mutatis-mutandis the decision taken by the Govt. of India on the recommendations of the Fourth Central Pay Commission for its employees for the change over from Contributory Provident Fund Scheme to Pension Scheme in the manner as indicated in the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Deptt. Of Pension and Pensioners' Welfare) O.M. No. 4/1/87PIC dated 1.5.1987.
2. It has, accordingly, been decided that persons joining service in the Sangathan on or after 1.1.1986 shall be governed only by the G.P.F.-cum-Pension Scheme and will have no option for C.P.F. Scheme. However, for all CPF beneficiaries, who were in service on 1.1.1986, the decision taken shall be Implemented in the manner hereinafter indicated.
3. All C.P.F. beneficiaries, who were in service on 1.1.1986 and who are still in service on the date of issue of these orders will be deemed to have come over to the Pension Scheme.
3.2 The employees of the category mentioned above will, however, have an option to continue under the CPF Scheme, if they so desired. The option will have to be exercised and conveyed to the concerned Head of office/Principal by 31.1.1989. In duplicate, in the form enclosed (one form may be sent to this office while the other kept with personal records of the employee concerned) if the employees wish to continue under the CPF Scheme. If no option is received by the Head of Office/Principal by the above date and in this office through them by 28.2.1989 the employees will be deemed to have come over the Pension Scheme.
The Head of Office/Principals are to forward in one lot options exercised by employees for retention of CPF Scheme received by them, to reach Sangathan's Office latest by 28.2.1989, where no option to continue under the CPF Scheme is received by them from any, a nil report be sent by due date viz. 28.2.1989.
3.3 The C.P.F beneficiaries, who were in service-on 1.1.1986, but. haye since retired and in whose case retirement benefits have also been paid under the C.P.F Scheme, will have option to have their retirement benefits calculated under the Pension Scheme provided they refund to the Sangathan, the Sangathan contribution (Management Share) to the Contributory Provident Fund and the interest thereon, drawn by them at the time of settlement of the CPF account. Such option shall be exercised latest by 31.1.1989.
xxxxx 3.6 The Option once exercised shall be final. xxxxx 4.2 In the case of employees referred to above, who come over or are deemed to come over to the Pension Scheme, the Sangathan's contribution to the CPF together with the interest thereon credited to the CPF account of the employee will be resumed by the
Sangathan.
The employees contribution together with the interest thereon at his credit in the CPF account will be transferred to the CPF account, to be allotted to him on his coming over to the Pension 6FK HPH ́ 5.
At this stage, it would be relevant to note that Mr. K. K. Rai, learned Senior Counsel for some of the employees of the KVS, pursuant to our Order dated 14.07.2025, furnished consolidated written submissions on behalf of the employees, and submitted that all the writ petitions can be categorized into three categories, which are as follows:
I. Category A: Employees who had not opted to continue in the CPF Scheme during the prescribed period of five months, that is, from 01.09.1988 to 31.01.1989, in terms of the KVS OM dated 01.09.1988.
II. Category B: Employees who had opted to continue in the CPF Scheme during the said five-month period from 01.09.1988 to 31.01.1989 and now want to switch over to the GPF-cum-Pension Scheme. III. Category C:
Employees who were direct appointees (or whose services were confirmed/regularised) between 01.01.1986 and 31.12.2003, when the CPF Scheme was not in operation.
6.
The learned Senior Counsel has also provided us with a list, splitting all the petitions in the present batch into the three categories
mentioned above, as under:
Category 'A'
Category 'B'
Category 'C'
W.P. (C) Nos. 3172/2019, W.P.(C) Nos.
W.P.(C) Nos. 6557/2024, 2113/2020, 9479/2020, 2676/2020, 8970/2024, 15137/2024, 1440/2022, 10818/2022, 14455/2021, and 10408/2020. 1373/2024 and 12991/2023 12211/2023, 748/2024, Respondent 766/2024, 11077/2020, Nos. 7, 9 and 11 16726/2023,11465/2023, in W.P.(C) No. 11077/2020 10278/2020,13002/2021, 5718/2024, 9581/2024, 10032/2024, 50/2024 and Respondent Nos. 73 & 74 in W.P. (C) 14455/2021.
7.
The common grievance of the employees is that they seek retiral benefits under the GPF-cum-Pension Scheme instead of the CPF Scheme.
8.
Category A employees claim that they are eligible for the benefits under the GPF-cum-Pension Scheme as they never opted to remain in the CPF Scheme and, therefore, automatically came over to the GPF-cum-Pension Scheme as per the deeming provision under paragraph 3.2 of the OM dated 01.09.1988. Category B employees claim that though they had initially opted to continue under the CPF Scheme during the prescribed period, they should be entitled to switch over to the GPF-cum-Pension Scheme, based on principles of parity and equality, as similar opportunities had been granted to employees in other organizations as also KVS employees in other States.
Category C employees claim that as per paragraph 2 of the OM dated 01.09.1988, persons joining service in the KVS on or after 01.01.1986 shall be governed only by the GPF-cum-Pension Scheme and will have no option for the CPF Scheme, therefore, since they were borne in service post the cut-off date, they would automatically come under the GPF-cum-Pension Scheme.
9.
It is the case of the employees that in this regard, they requested the KVS to consider them under the GPF-cum-Pension Scheme and also submitted representations for the same, which were, however, rejected, prompting them to approach the learned Tribunal. 10.
The learned Tribunal was pleased to allow some OAs and dismiss the others. Accordingly, the KVS has filed Writ Petitions against the former, while the employees have filed Writ Petitions against the latter.
DELAY AND LACHES 11.
At the outset, we deem it appropriate to first address the common preliminary objection of delay and laches raised by the KVS across all categories.
SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE KVS 12.
The learned counsel for the KVS submitted that the present batch of petitions are liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. It was submitted that the actual cause of action arose way back in the year 1989, when the employees were asked to submit their option forms in terms of the KVS OM dated 01.09.1988. He
submitted that thus, the employees could not have approached the learned Tribunal or this Court at such a belated stage to voice their grievances, particularly when in some of the cases, the petitions have been filed many years after retirement, which is not permissible in law.
13.
The learned counsel vociferously urged that the employees have no right to receive the benefits under the GPF-cum-Pension Scheme by claiming that the said right is a continuous cause of action. It was submitted that even if it is assumed that the KVS had allowed them to make payments under the CPF Scheme despite not having opted for the same, the employees could have raised their grievances within a year from when the OM dated 01.09.1988 came into effect, that is, the period of limitation prescribed for filing an OA, and not beyond that. 14.
The learned counsel further submitted that the present petitions are squarely covered by the judgment passed by this Court in DTC v. Madhu Bhushan Anand, 2010 (172) DLT 668, and the employees have filed the present petitions belatedly, without any explanation for the delay and laches in approaching the learned Tribunal and, hence, the petitions are liable to be dismissed. In support of the said contention, the learned counsel also relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India and Ors. v. M.K. Sarkar, (2010) 2 SCC 59, and of this Court in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan v. Manju Sehgal, 2021:DHC:937-DB, and of the High Court of Kerala in M.R. Indira v. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Ors., 2023 SCC OnLine Ker 11465.