The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that employees appointed through advertisements issued before January 1, 2004, are entitled to the benefits of the Old Pension Scheme, even if their actual joining occurred after the introduction of the New Pension Scheme.
The case arose from an advertisement issued by the Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad, in 2003 for the post of Senior Medical Officer, which explicitly stated that the position would carry General Provident Fund-cum-Pension benefits. The respondent, who had previously worked with Indian Telephone Industries Limited, applied for the position and was selected. Due to delays in the selection process, the respondent joined the institute on June 30, 2004. By that time, the New Pension Scheme had been notified on December 22, 2003, and became effective from January 1, 2004. Despite the terms of the original advertisement, the respondent was placed under the New Pension Scheme. After multiple representations to the institute were ignored, the respondent filed a writ petition seeking enforcement of the original pension benefits. The writ court ruled in favor of the respondent, holding that the benefits promised in the advertisement must be honored, leading the institute to appeal the decision.
The Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Rajesh Shankar, observed that the advertisement explicitly promised GPF-cum-Pension benefits. The Court emphasized that the terms of service, including the pension scheme, as specified at the time of the advertisement, are binding on both the employer and the prospective employee. The Court also referred to precedent that confirmed employees are entitled to benefits available at the time of the advertisement, irrespective of subsequent policy changes. It held that employees selected through advertisements issued before the cut-off date are entitled to the Old Pension Scheme, even if their actual appointment or joining occurs after the introduction of a new pension scheme.
The High Court clarified that the promise of pension benefits in a job advertisement forms a binding contractual obligation, and policy changes enacted later cannot override these assurances. The decision reinforces the principle that employees must be granted the benefits explicitly offered to them in the advertisement under which they applied and were selected. It further underscores that administrative delays or procedural formalities cannot be used as a basis to deny lawful entitlements.
In conclusion, the Jharkhand High Court’s ruling confirms that terms and conditions specified in a job advertisement, including pension schemes, are enforceable. Employees appointed pursuant to such advertisements are entitled to the benefits promised at the time of publication, even if actual joining occurs after the introduction of new policies. This judgment ensures that genuine expectations created by employment advertisements are respected and that employees are not deprived of promised benefits due to subsequent administrative or policy changes.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.