Sunita Ray vs PRASAR BHARTI on 12 November 2026

O R D E R

PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A):

Although, we have heard these three OAs separately, one after the other, since the facts and issues involved in the cases are basically same and similar, for the sake of convenience, this common order is passed, which shall govern all the three OAs.

2. It is the case of the applicant that her case squarely comes within the scope and ambit of the DoP&T OMs issued time and again relating to coverage under Central Civil Service (Pension) RAVI KUMAR

Rules, 1972 in place of National Pension System but the respondents illegally and arbitrarily rejected her claim vide order dated 07.11.2025 with due application of mind, for which, she has filed this OA seeking direction to the respondents to bring her within the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 in place of NPS by quashing the order of rejection dated 07.11.2025.

3. Respondents filed their counter contesting/objecting the case of the applicant. According to them, pursuant to DG, DDK, New Delhi, Office Order dated 02.11.2005, 8 posts of LDC belonging to UR category were shifted to DDK, Bhubaneswar for regularization of equal number of casual General assistant/Copyist, whose names were enlisted for regularization and the applicant is one among them. Accordingly, vide letter dated 16.01.2006, offer of appointment was issued to the applicant against the shifted post of LDC from DDK, Jalandhar for regularization. She accepted the terms and conditions of letter dated 16.01.2006 and joined at DDK, BBSR in the forenoon of 20.01.2006 against the post of LDC. It is stated that the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances RAVI KUMAR

and Pensions, Department of Pension and Pensioners' Welfare, New Delhi, issued OM No. 57/05/2021-P&PW(B) dated 03.03.2023 giving one time option to the Central Government civil employee for inclusion under the CCS(Pension) Rules, 1972 (now 2021) who has been appointed against a post or vacancy which was advertised/notified for recruitment/appointment prior to notification for National Pension System i.e. 22.12.2003 and the last date of submission of option was fixed as “31.08.2023” with further stipulation in para 5 those Government servants who are eligible to exercise option in accordance with the OM, but who do not exercise this option by the stipulated date, shall continue to be covered by the National Pension System. Whereas, in the instant case, the applicant submitted representation on 11.09.2025, i.e. after the expiry of the prescribed cutoff date and, therefore, the same was considered and rejected. In course of hearing, Ld Counsel for the respondents submitted that the applicant did not pray to antedate her date of regularization, of course being barred by limitation nor is it her prayer to take into consideration her RAVI KUMAR

entire period of service towards pension and pensionary benefits. Insofar as the decision of this Bench dated 08.10.2024 in OA No. 647 of 2021[Biswambar Barik Vs UOI] is concerned, it is stated that the said Biswambar Barik was contractually engaged and regularized by DG: DD, New Delhi. Subsequently he was posted on transfer under DG: AIR. While being under DG: AIR, he exercised his option for switchover from NPS to OPS which was rejected by DG: AIR. The said rejection order was challenged by him before this Bench in O.A. No. 647/2021, which was disposed of remitting the matter back to the respondents for reconsideration, vide order dated 08.10.2024. In compliance of the order of this Bench, the case of Sh. Biswambar Barik was reconsidered by the authority and upon being found that his regularization was pursuant to the order of the Hon’ble Apex Court dated 29.02.1996, that too, against a vacancy existing before 31.12.2003, he was brought within the OPS. Therefore, according to respondents, the said case has no application to the case in hand.

4. Heard. RAVI KUMAR

5. Admittedly, the Govt. of India, Department of Pension and P.W issued OM No. 57/04/2019-P&PW(B) dated 17.02.2020 on the subject of “coverage under Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, in place of National Pension System, of those Central Government employees whose selection for appointment was finalized before 01.01.2004 but who joined Government service on or after 01.01.2004” inter alia stating that such Government servants, who were declared successful for recruitment in the results declared on or before 31.12.2003 against vacancies occurring before 01.01.2004 and are covered under the National Pension System on joining service on or after 01.01.2004, may be given one-time option to be covered under the CCS(Pension) Rules, 1972. This option may be exercised by the concerned Government servants latest by 31.05.2020. In the said OM dated 17.02.2020, it was further clarified that the above option would be available to only those Government servants who were declared successful for recruitment before 01.01.2004, against vacancies pertaining to the period prior to that date. This option shall, however, not be available to the Government servants RAVI KUMAR

appointed on or after 01.01.2004 if they fall in any of the following categories:

(i) Government servants whose names were included in a panel of selected candidates before 01.01.2004 for recruitment against vacancies occurring on or after 01.01.2004 and were, accordingly, recruited on or after 01.01.2004.

(ii) A Government servant whose name was included in a panel of selected candidates prepared before 01.01.2004 for vacancies arising before and after 01.01.2004 but was actually appointed after 31.12.2003 against a vacancy arising on or after 01.01.2004.

(iii) Government servants who were selected against vacancies pertaining to the period prior to 01.01.2004 on the basis of an advertisement/notification issued before 01.01.2004 or a written examination/interview held before 01.01.2004 but results for recruitment were declared on or after 01.01.2004.

(iv) Government servants who joined on or after 01.01.2004 after they were granted extension of joining time on their own request and, in accordance with the instructions issued by the Department of Personnel & Training, their seniority was depressed on account of such extension of joining time to a batch for which the result for recruitment was declared on or after 01.01.2004.

6. Thereafter, the Government of India Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions Department of Pension and Pensioners Welfare, New Delhi issued another OM No. 57/05/2021-P&PW(B) dated 03.03.2023 giving further clarification relating to switching over from NPS to OPS inter alia RAVI KUMAR

stating that in all cases where the Central Government civil employee has been appointed against a post or vacancy which was advertised/notified for recruitment/appointment, prior to the date of notification for National Pension System, i.e. 22.12.2003, and is covered under the National Pension System on joining service on or after 01.01.2004, may be given a one- time option to be covered under the CCS(Pension) Rules, 1972 (now 2021). This option may be exercised by the concerned Government servants latest by 31.08.2023. The option once exercised shall be final. Those Government servants who are eligible to exercise option in accordance with the OM, but who do not exercise this option by the stipulated date, shall continue to be covered by the National Pension System.

7. Ld. Counsel for the applicant, referring to the documents placed along with the OA, has submitted that the applicant was initially engaged as Casual General Assistant on 18.11.1988 and was eligible under scheme for regularization dated 09.06.1992 and revised scheme dated 17.03.1994. The name of the applicant found place at serial No.9 of the eligibility list/panel list of Casual RAVI KUMAR

General Assistant dated 01.08.1995. She was asked to submit her willingness to be regularized in any Doordarshan Kendra vide letter dated 07.05.1999 and she had also submitted her willingness to be regularized in any Doordarshan Kendra. Vide order dated 03.11.2005, she was regularized. During pendency of the abovementioned case, she retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.05.2026.

8. According to him, the Govt. of India, Department of Pension and PW, New Delhi issued OM dated 17.02.2020 making certain relaxation for the appointees appointed on and after 01.01.2004 for switching over to OPS, pursuant to which, applicant submitted representation on 22.05.2020 requesting to bring her within the OPS. The same was forwarded by the DDK, BBSR to DG, DD, New Delhi in letter dated 27.05.2020 and 18.09.2020 but no decision was communicated to her on the same. While the matter stood thus, the Subsequently also, the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Pension and Pensioners' Welfare, New Delhi, issued OM No. 57/05/2021-P&PW(B) dated 03.03.2023 giving RAVI KUMAR

one time option to the Central Government civil employee for inclusion under the CCS(Pension) Rules, 1972 (now 2021) who has been appointed against a post or vacancy which was advertised/notified for recruitment/appointment prior to notification for National Pension System. The applicant did not submit any option due to pendency of her representation to switch over to OPS was still under consideration. When no decision was communicated to her, while bringing many similarly situated persons within the OPS, she submitted representation on 11.09.2025 to switch over to OPS. It is stated that the respondents’ department without taking into consideration her earlier representation dated 22.05.2020 forwarded by the DDK, BBSR to DG, DD, New Delhi in letter dated 27.05.2020 and 18.09.2020, rejected the same arbitrarily on the ground that she submitted her option after the cut off date [31.08.2023] as fixed in OM dated 03.03.2023. Further, by placing the information dated 17/21.04.2025 obtained under RTI Act, 2005, it is stated that the vacancy position in the grade of LDC at DDK, Jalandhar as on 01.01.2002 was 15, 01.01.2003 RAVI KUMAR

was 16, 01.01.2004 was 16 and 01.01.2005 was 19. According to the respondents, the applicant was regularized upon transfer of the vacancy from DDK, Jalandhar to DDK, BBSR, which, therefore, relate back to the vacancy caused prior to 01.01.2004. It is also stated that similar matter came up before this Bench in O.A No.129/2018, 725/2019 and O.A No.776/2024 and relief were granted by this Bench vide order dated 26.09.2025 and 30.01.2026. The order dated 26.09.2025 has also been implemented by the authorities vide order dated 10.12.2025. The present case is also covered by the order dated 08.10.2024 of this Bench in O.A No.647 of 2021, which has also been implemented by the authorities vide order dated 25.03.2025. Last but not the least, it is stated that as per law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Punjab School Education Board & another Vs. Satnam Singh & Others in Civil Appeal No.6865 of 2022 dated 08.09.2026, this Bench vide order dated 25.09.2026 in О.А No.130/2018 directed to bring the said applicant within the purview of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 since the entry of the applicant was prior to 01.01.2004 on casual/ RAVI KUMAR

daily wage/ad-hoc basis. In stating so, he has prayed for allowing the relief claimed by the applicant.

9. After giving consideration to the submissions of the parties, perused the records.

10. Admittedly, the respondents in compliance of the judicial orders and in relaxation of the rules, prepared the list of Casual Artist/Copyist wherein the name of applicant did appear at Sl. No.9 and letter dated 07.05.1999 was issued to her inviting her willingness to be regularized in any Doordarsan other than DDK where she was engaged on casual basis and, according to the applicant, she submitted her willingness then and there. Accordingly, it is not in dispute that she joined on regular basis on 20.01.2006. It is also not in dispute that pursuant to the OM dated 17.02.2020, she submitted representation on 22.05.2020 to switch over to OPS, which was duly forwarded in letters dated 27.05.2020 and 18.09.2020 to DG, DD, New Delhi but no decision was taken and communicated to her. In the said circumstances, she was under the bona fide impression that since her representation is still under consideration, no further option was RAVI KUMAR

to be submitted by her pursuant to the subsequent OM dated 03.03.2023. When others were allowed to switch over to OPS, similar representation on 11.09.2025 for consideration of her case to switch over to OPS was submitted, which representation ought not to have been rejected by the respondents referring to the cut off date without considering her earlier representation dated 22.05.2020 forwarded in letters dated 27.05.2020 and 18.09.2020. In the said circumstances, we are of the considered view that the rejection of her request by stating that her representation is beyond the cut off date , i.e. 31.08.2023 fixed in the OM dated 03.03.2023 is not entertainable is held to be bad in law. Accordingly, the order of rejection dated 07.11.2025 is hereby quashed and the matter is remitted back to the respondents to consider her request to switch over to OPS keeping in mind the DoP&T OMs dated 17.02.2020 and 03.03.2023 and decision of this Bench as well of the Hon’ble Apex Court discussed above. The final decision to be taken in the matter shall be communicated to the applicant within a period of 120 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. RAVI KUMAR

11. Insofar as OA No. 584/2025 [Raj Mohan Sahoo Vs UOI & Ors] is concerned, we find that the applicant as an empanelled casual artist was appointed on regular basis against the post shifted from DDK, Srinagar on 06/07.09.2005 and he joined on 30.09.2005. Pursuant to OM dated 17.02.2020, he submitted application on 22.05.2020 to switch over to OPS, which was forwarded on 18.-09.2020. Against he submitted application on 10.12.2020 to come over under CCS (Pepsin) Rules, 1972, which was forwarded to 17.12.2020. By filing this OA he has sought to direct the respondents to bring him within the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Respondents filed their counter objecting the stand of the applicant on the ground as stated in OA No. 583/2025, as discussed above, which we would not like to repeat once again. In the said premises, this OA is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider the case of the applicant to switch over to OPS keeping in mind the DoP&T OMs dated 17.02.2020 and 03.03.2023 as also the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Satnam Singh & Others (supra) and various orders passed by this Bench, as noted above, RAVI KUMAR

and communicate the final decision to be taken in the matter to the applicant within a period of 120 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

12. Insofar as OA No. 585/2025 [Prasanna Das Vs UOI & Ors], we find that the applicant as an empanelled casual artist was appointed on regular basis against the post shifted from DDK, Srinagar on 19.09.2005 and he joined on 23.09.2005, which was accepted on 30.09/21.10.2005. Pursuant to OM dated 17.02.2020, he submitted application on 22.05.2020 to switch over to OPS, which was forwarded on 27.05.2020. Again, he submitted application on 10.12.2020 to come over under CCS (Pepsin) Rules, 1972, which was forwarded to 17.12.2020. By filing this OA he has sought to direct the respondents to bring him within the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Respondents filed their counter objecting the stand of the applicant on the ground as stated in OA No. 583/2025, as discussed above, which we would not like to repeat once again. In the said premises, this OA is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider the case of the applicant to switch over to OPS keeping in mind the RAVI KUMAR

DoP&T OMs dated 17.02.2020 and 03.03.2023 as also the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Satnam Singh & Others (supra) and various orders passed by this Bench, as noted above, and communicate the final decision to be taken in the matter to the applicant within a period of 120 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

13. In view of the detailed discussions made above, all the three OAs stand disposed of without any order as to costs.

(Pramod Kumar Das)

(Sudhi Ranjan Mishra) Member (Admn.)

Member (Judl.)

RK/PS

RAVI KUMAR