Intellectual Property Rights: Practice and Drafting by Adv Gautam Matani. Register Now!
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

S M   17 November 2023

Nps to ops for central government employees

Can a junior to me be given OPS while myself being denied the opportunity to switch to OPS from NPS purely based on DoP&PW notification dt 03/03/2023 which fixes the eligibility criteria ( for switching to OPS) based on notification of advertisement date  which shall have to be prior to 22/12/2003. My junior (LDC post) has been appointed on Dec2005 against advertisement published on 9/12/2003 (i.e advertisement prior to cut off date of 22/12/2003)while I have been appointed on 28/03/2005( before the appointment of junior) based on advertisement published on Nov.2004. (is advertisement after cut off date of 22/12/2003). No importance has been given to my being senior in service .


 11 Replies

P. Venu (Advocate)     17 November 2023

You are not eligible in terms of the prevailing norms.

S M   17 November 2023

Sir , does that mean in my office a senior appointed at a earlier date will be deprived of the opportunity to switch over to OPS while my junior appointed at a later date will enjoy the benefit of OPS ? 

P. Venu (Advocate)     17 November 2023

Your obsession with 'senior'  and 'junior' is rather incomprehensible. . The recruitment has been through different notifications. You are attempting to compare the incomparables.

Also, the so-called junior is in LDC cadre while you are, it appears, in a different cadre

1 Like

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Advocate)     18 November 2023

Besides the oipinion of the learned expert Mr. Venu, you may clarify the date of advertisement to the post in which you were absorbed, if it was subsequent to introduction of NPS, you may not be eligible for switching over to the OPS.

You should understand the fact that when your post was advertised the new pension scheme was already in force and was duly enacted.

Whereas in the case of  junior who was appointed on the basis of the advertisement during which the OPS was prevalent, then your grievance on this is not justified and may not be maintainable even if you contemplate to elevate the matter legally

S M   18 November 2023

Sir, what about the fact that this Ex post facto (DoO&PW  letter dt 03/03/2023) change in eligibility criteria to avail OPS has deprived me of an opportunity to take an informed decision way back in 2003 wherein I too could have joined as an LDC to avail OPS rather than apply for an Engineering cadre commensurate with my qualification. 

Sudhir Kumar, Advocate (Advocate)     18 November 2023

what deptt has said.            

S M   18 November 2023

Simply denied to grant me & similarly placed employees the opportunity to switch over to OPS. Another fact worth noting is that  the MoD approval/release of vacancies ( for vacancies rising in  year 2000-2001 to 2003-2004) for direct recruitment to the post of Gr B, C & D was communicated to OFB way back in May 2003 i.e prior to the cut off date of 22/12/2003 . ( Both the non tech i.e LDC and us the technical group was recruited by OFB based on the MoD ) . It however turns out that the non-tech group happens to be very lucky that there recruitment ad was sent to davp prior to 22/12/2003 while for us it was sent in Nov.2004. Does not it point towards discrimination. How bad it is in the eyes of Law that a serious matter like eligibility for OPS is simply a matter of chance/luck as to whose ad has been sent to davp for publishing prior to 22/12/2003 and all these vide a Ex post facto order dated 03/03/2003 depriving the applicants to take a informed decision. It may be noted that the aforesaid MoD approval of May 2003 releases vacancies arising way back in 2000-2001 which points out to administrative delays of 02 yrs (approx). How strong can be the case for seeking judicial remedy?

P. Venu (Advocate)     18 November 2023

"I too could have joined as an LDC to avail OPS rather than apply for an Engineering cadre commensurate with my qualification." 

You should be satisfied that you are emplyed in a post commensurate with your qualification and expertise, and thus enabling you to expand your horizon professionally,  than being too obsessed with post retirement benefits.

S M   18 November 2023

My level of job satisfaction is best left to me. A more objective professional answer was expected.

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Advocate)     18 November 2023

By not availing the opportunity available before you at that time, it can be understood that you very badly missed the bus.

However, not all doors are shut yet.

You still can look for a solution through due process of law.

You can make a representation to the employer followed by a writ petition before high court to get your grievances redressed.

Sudhir Kumar, Advocate (Advocate)     18 November 2023

you may better visit a lwyer in his office as you are not able to convey your viewpoimt here.

Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  

Recent Topics

View More