Court upholds order on pension for PGI doctors

Saurabh Malik
Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, October 23

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld an order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, whereby the benefit of the General Provident Fund-cum-old pension scheme was extended to PGI doctors working uninterruptedly in different departments before January 1, 2004.

The doctors were earlier appointed on an ad hoc basis against regular sanctioned posts and continued after the regular selection without a break. The CAT ruled that the doctors appointed assistant professors in the PGI against regular sanctioned posts possessed all qualifications and experience to be appointed on a regular basis and performed the same duties.

The doctors earned all regular increments and were extended benefits of housing and medical care on a par with the regular employees. The doctors were, subsequently, appointed on a regular basis from 2005 to 2011. The regular appointments were done maintaining continuity. Even their pay, along with past increments, was protected and carried forward.

The doctors, however, agitated against “wrongful denial” of the benefit of the old pension scheme by the Central Government, despite recommendations in their favour by the PGI governing body, headed by the Union Health Minister.

It was noted that the delay in regular appointment by the PGI beyond January 1, 2004, was attributable to the PGI. It was on account of the time taken in the selection committee meeting, even though regular posts were advertised in 2003 before the new pension scheme came into effect.

The new scheme, the doctors claimed, was only a contributory provident fund plan without the element of pension.

Allowing the plea, the CAT ruled that the initial date of appointment would be relevant for purposes of coverage under the old pension scheme. In the case in hand, the old pension scheme was in existence.

The CAT judgment was challenged by the Union of India before the High Court. Appearing for the PGI doctors, senior advocate Gurminder Singh and Harpriya Khaneka reiterated the factum of pay protection.  The Bench was also told that continuity in service was granted to the doctors earlier appointed on an ad hoc basis against regular vacant posts. They, thereafter, continued on the same posts as regular employees upon selection following the issuance of an advertisement. 

Gurminder Singh further argued that the issue of delay in regular appointment beyond January 1, 2004, was attributable to the PGI. It was also argued that even the PGI rules envisaged the counting of service from the initial appointment for purposes of qualifying service. 

Were earlier appointed on an ad hoc basis

The doctors were earlier appointed on an ad hoc basis against regular sanctioned posts and continued after the regular selection without a break. The CAT had ruled that the doctors appointed assistant professors in the PGI against regular sanctioned posts possessed all qualifications and experience to be appointed on a regular basis and performed the same duties.