GUWAHATI, India, Dec. 30 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on Nov. 28:

1. Heard Mr. R. B. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. M. K. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. K. Kalita, learned counsel for the respondents/Oil India Limited.

2. By filing these writ petitions, the petitioners have put to challenge the impugned orders/communications dated 01.06.2017 & 03.07.2017, issued by the Executive Director (HR), for Chairman & Managing Director, Oil India Limited, whereby their claims for pensionary benefits under Oil India Pension Fund, applicable to pre-Nationalization employees, has been rejected. The petitioners prayed for a direction to grant pensionary benefits to them from its due date along with arrears.

3. Having considered that issue involved in these writ petitions is similar on facts and law, same were heard analogously and disposed of by this common judgment and order.

4. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that they joined Oil India Limited ('OIL', for short) as Graduate Engineer Trainees ('GET', for short) in the year 1980 and 1981 and subsequently retired on attaining the age of superannuation. On 14.10.1981, the OIL was nationalized through an Act of the Parliament of India, namely, the Burmah Oil Company [Acquisition of Shares of Oil India Limited and of the undertaking in India of Assam Oil Company Limited and the Burmah Oil Co. Ltd. (India Trading) Limited] Act, 1981 ('Acquisition Act of 1981', for short). The petitioners claim that they were appointed prior to nationalization and their pensionary benefits were governed by the Burma Oil (India) Pension Fund ('BOIPF', for short), a superannuation fund to which the Company contributed during the course of their employment. They were also allotted unique membership numbers used throughout their service for accessing employment-related benefits and, subsequently, for superannuation entitlements.

5. Upon nationalization, although their services were transferred to the newly constituted OIL, the petitioners continued to be members of the existing Provident Fund and Pension Fund schemes, including the Family Pension Scheme. After enactment of the Acquisition Act of 1981, OIL was obligated to create a new pension fund equivalent to the existing BOIPF so that the right of the beneficiaries are not prejudiced.

6. The Board of Directors of OIL, in its 210th meeting held on 24.02.1982, decided to introduce the Executive Trainee Scheme to attract future recruits, which included an enhanced stipend and execution of a bond requiring service for three years upon completion of training. The benefits of this scheme were also extended to the petitioners whose services stood transferred under Section 11(1) of the Acquisition Act of 1981. Accordingly, the petitioners executed bonds undertaking to serve the Company for three years after confirmation as Executives. Even prior to completion of the stipulated training period, they were appointed as Engineer Executives with effect from 24.02.1982 and their services were regularized from their initial date of appointment as GET.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=eISc8sUCYnQFBVP%2BVeJCOIScFYiUkpjblcUhQArceh7a155yaYHdJBmSYL2Ndw8n&caseno=WP(C)/5845/2017&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010041292017&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.