In major relief, Punjab govt notifies implementation of Old Pension Scheme for nearly 2,500 employees
In a huge relief to nearly 2,500 government employees in Punjab, the state government Friday issued a notification implementing the Old Pension Scheme (OPS) for employees whose posts were advertised or appointment letters were issued before January 1, 2004, but who had joined the service later. These employees were earlier covered under the New Pension Scheme (NPS) despite their pre-2004 recruitment process, prompting them to seek judicial intervention.
The notification, dated May 23, 2025, follows a Punjab and Haryana High Court directive, bringing to a close a long legal battle fought by the affected employees. Many of them have already completed more than 20 years in service. The employees are from various departments, including the Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL), education, local bodies, and others.
According to the amended rules under the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume II, OPS will now apply to employees who joined after January 1, 2004, provided their posts were advertised or appointment letters were issued before that date. Employees appointed on compassionate grounds after January 1, 2004, will also be covered under OPS if the request for appointment and eligibility conditions were fulfilled before January 1, 2004.
Eligible employees will be given the option to choose between OPS and the New Defined Contributory Pension Scheme (NPS). If no option is exercised within three months from the notification date, they will be deemed to have opted for NPS.
Jasvir Talwara, convenor of the Purani Pension Bahali Sangharsh Committee, welcomed the decision and termed it a victory for justice. 'These employees were unfairly placed under NPS despite having fulfilled all conditions for OPS. The May 23 notification is a big win for them,' he said.
Talwara added that the government must now act swiftly to comply with the high court's direction to open General Provident Fund (GPF) accounts for the 2,500 employees by May 28, 2025, so the implementation process of OPS can begin.
However, he also raised concerns that around 2 lakh other employees, who joined service after January 1, 2004, continue to be excluded from OPS despite promises made by the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) before the 2022 Assembly polls. 'The government issued a notification in November 2022 promising OPS for all, but implementation has not happened. Instead, AAP ministers are now urging us to consider the Unified Pension Scheme introduced by the Centre last year, which we reject,' Talwara said.
While Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann recently reiterated the implementation of OPS for employees with pre-2004 appointments, he made no mention of the larger group of post-2004 employees still awaiting relief.
The OPS notification for the 2,500 employees marks a partial fulfilment of the government's commitment, but the larger demand for a complete rollback of NPS remains unresolved, said Rajat Mahajan, president of the Purani Pension Bahali Sangharsh Committee.
In the first week of May, the committee members highlighted the case of Sarwan Singh who retired as a drawing teacher on July 31, 2021, under NPS. Singh now gets a pension of just Rs 4,520 per month and earns a living by setting up a burger stall in Hoshiarpur's Dasuya. It is just the tip of the iceberg, said Mahajan. The committee urged the Punjab government to remember the promises it made in 2022 before coming to power.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
United News of India
5 hours ago
- United News of India
Telangana Guv participates in West Bengal state Foundation day celebrations held in Raj Bhavan
Hyderabad, June 20 (UNI): Telangana Governor of Jishnu Dev Varma participated in the West Bengal State Foundation Day celebrations held at Raj Bhavan, here on Friday . The event showcased the rich cultural heritage of West Bengal, with active participation from Bengali associations based in Hyderabad. The celebration featured traditional classical and folk dance performances by Bengali artists, bringing vibrancy and grandeur to the occasion. In his address on the occasion, the Governor paid homage to the illustrious legacy of West Bengal, lauding its immense contributions to the nation's cultural, intellectual, and spiritual landscape. He underscored the strong historical and cultural ties between Bengal and Telangana, and emphasised the importance of such celebrations in promoting national unity through the spirit of Ek Bharat, Shreshtha Bharat. Reflecting on Bengal's enduring impact on India's journey, the Governor said that the state has produced towering figures in literature, philosophy, social reform, and the freedom movement. He recalled that the national song "Vande Mataram", which inspired millions during the freedom struggle, and the national anthem "Jana Gana Mana"—composed by Gurudev Rabindranath Tagore—both originated from Bengal. Quoting a famous remark, he said, 'What Bengal thinks today, the nation thinks tomorrow.' Acting Chief Justice of the High Court of Telangana, Justice Sujoy Paul, in his address, paid tribute to the legacy of Justice Ashutosh Mukherjee, an eminent jurist and former Vice Chancellor. He also noted that the first Indian judge of the High Court was a Bengali, underlining Bengal's historic contributions to India's judicial and academic spheres. Justice Ms Moushumi Bhattacharjee, Judge, High Court of Telangana; Sabyasachi Ghosh, Special Chief Secretary to Government; and M. Dana Kishore, Principal Secretary to the Governor, also spoke on the occasion. The event witnessed enthusiastic participation from several Bengali dignitaries, Raj Bhavan officers and staff, and members of the Bengali community residing in Hyderabad, making it a memorable and inclusive celebration. UNI KNR SSP
India Today
6 hours ago
- India Today
Judiciary shouldn't override public policy: Court backs slum rehab on open land
The Bombay High Court has refused to strike down a provision under the Development Control and Promotion Regulations (DCPR) 2034, which allows the use of public open spaces for slum redevelopment projects. The court said that decisions related to urban planning should be left to the authorities and not the judiciary unless there is a clear violation of legal or constitutional bench of Justices Amit Borkar and Somasekhar Sunderasan delivered the verdict while hearing a petition filed by an alliance of NGOs in 2002. The petition challenged the use of open spaces, meant for parks, gardens, and playgrounds, for slum rehabilitation schemes. The petitioners argued that the policy went against the principles of sustainable development and the public trust doctrine, which protects public assets from private court examined regulation 17(3)(D)(2) of the DCPR 2034, which permits reserved open spaces above 500 square metres to be used for slum redevelopment. The policy requires that at least 35 per cent of the ground area be left vacant and continue to serve public purposes. The bench said, "The regulation shows a sincere attempt to balance two competing rights, exactly as the Constitution requires. It supports a vision of environmental well-being that also respects human dignity, and promotes a model of urban growth that includes the poor, rather than pushing them to the city's margins."advertisementIt also said that courts must respect the limits of judicial review. "This does not mean that courts have no role. As constitutional protectors, courts must step in where a policy violates the law, infringes fundamental rights, or is arbitrary and unfair," the bench added."But, even while doing so, the court must remain within the boundaries of judicial review and avoid functioning as a policymaking authority, particularly when the government has followed due process and attempted to balance competing interests in an open and fair manner," the court further the High Court had passed an ad-interim order restraining the government from approving any new slum rehabilitation schemes on such lands without court permission. The interim order remained in effect for nearly two decades, during which time several developers and housing societies had to approach the court to seek Watch IN THIS STORY#Mumbai
Indian Express
6 hours ago
- Indian Express
Punjab and Haryana HC disposes of Chandigarh slum dwellers' resettlement plea
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has disposed of a petition filed by Sanjay Patel and others seeking resettlement after being removed from land owned by the Chandigarh Administration. The case, which has been in court for over a decade, is the latest in a long legal tussle between the petitioners and the authorities. The High Court bench of Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Aman Chaudhary passed the order on June 19. The petitioners had approached the court after their earlier attempt to enforce a 2016 court decision in their favour was rejected last year. The dispute began in 2012, when the petitioners — slum residents — had gone to a civil court, challenging their removal from the land. In 2016, the court partly ruled in their favour, saying two things: first, they could only be evicted through legal means, and secondly, the government should consider their claim for resettlement under welfare policies for slum dwellers. However, when the petitioners tried to act on this 2016 ruling by filing another case in 2019 to make the administration carry it out, the court rejected it in 2023. The judge in that case said the earlier order (called a decree) was limited in what it allowed, and the court couldn't go beyond what had already been stated. In its June 19 judgment, the High Court agreed with that view. It noted that the land belongs to the Chandigarh Administration and that the petitioners' claims had already been looked into and turned down. The court said the earlier judgment had run its course and could not be stretched to give the petitioners further relief. The petitioners had likely hoped the court would rely on a landmark 1985 Supreme Court judgment (Olga Tellis vs. Bombay Municipal Corporation), which held that eviction of slum dwellers without resettlement violated their right to life. But the High Court said that case didn't help in this situation because the Chandigarh Administration had already examined and rejected the petitioners' claims based on city development plans under the Chandigarh Master Plan. While disposing of the case, the court said the petitioners were still free to challenge the latest order passed by the Chandigarh Administration on June 18, 2025, if they wish to pursue the matter further. The case was argued by advocates Anil Mehta and Sukriti Kaur for the petitioners. The Chandigarh Administration was represented by senior standing counsel Amit Jhanji, along with Sumeet Jain and Himanshu Arora.
