Rajendra Babu, J. - (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Respondents 1 to 7 are retired employees of the Transport Undertaking of the Pune Municipal Corporation ("Municipal Corporation" for short). Respondent No. 1 retired on 20-10-1962, respondent No. 2 on 15-8-1968, respondent No. 3 on 1-7-1974, respondent No. 4 on 1-8-1977, respondent No. 5 on 31-3-1975, respondent No. 6 on 2-1-1967 and the respondent No. 7 on 13-9-1961 under S. 465(3)(a) of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949, the Pune Municipal Corporation had introduced Provident Fund Regulations for its employees in November, 1950 which were made applicable to officers and employees of the Transport Undertaking in the Corporation. At the time of retirement these respondents had received provident fund amount standing to their credit in the account. The Municipal Corporation framed Pension Scheme for its employees in the year 1954. However, employees of the Transport Undertaking were not included in the said Scheme because Transport Undertaking itself was a separate autonomous body. The 1954 Scheme was replaced by a revised Pension Regulation Scheme of 1960. In the year 1970, the Corporation framed Pension Regulations for the employees of the Transport Undertaking which were approved by the Government of Maharashtra and became effective from 1-4-1967. Respondents 1, 6 and 7 had retired prior to 1-4-1967 and, therefore, the benefits under the said Pension Scheme were not available to them. 2nd respondent though he had retired was covered by the Scheme as he retired subsequent to 1-4-1967. Respondents 3, 4 and 5 were still in-service when the Scheme was introduced and these respondents 2, 3, 4 and 5 were informed of the Pension Scheme and were asked to give their option to have the benefit of the said Scheme. None of them opted for the new Scheme. A modification was made to the Pension Scheme of 1970 on 16-1-1975 and sub-regulation No. IV of the Pension Scheme which is relevant for our purpose was inserted which reads as follows:- "Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rules (ii) and (iii) Municipal Officers and Servants who were appointed in Poona Municipal Transport before 1st July, 1970 and are still in service in Poona Municipal Transport on or before 1st August, 1973 and who have been deemed to have opted to remain under the Provident Fund Regulations of Employees' Provident Fund Act, 1952, shall have a further option to elect to be governed by these Regulations or to remain under the Regulations of the Employees Provident Fund Act, 1952 applicable to him. This option shall be exercised within three months of the date on which approval of Government to this rule is communicated. Option once exercised will be final." Again the said Scheme was modified on 8-1-1985 and sub-regulation (5) of the modified Scheme reads as follows:- "The Officers and Servants of the Pune Municipal Transport Undertaking who were in the service before 1st April, 1971 and those who are in the service on or after 1st April, 1978 and who have been deemed to have opted to remain under the Provident Fund Act, 1952 shall have a further option to elect the Pension Rules of the Pune Municipal Transport Undertaking or to remain under the Regulations of the Employees' Provident Fund Act, 1952 applicable to them. This option shall be exercised within three months from the date on which approval of Government to this Rule is communicated. Option once exercised final."
(3.) The Municipal Corporation passed a resolution on 18-11-1986 extending the benefit of the Pension Rules to the employees with retrospective effect from 1st January, 1957. Even in cases where a pensioner had died, the benefit was made available to his heirs. A writ petition was filed in the year 1990 to apply the resolution dated 18-11-1986 so as to extend the benefit of pension scheme to the employees of the Transport Undertaking even though they had opted or were governed by the Provident Fund Scheme and retired after 1-1-1957, but prior to 29-11-1986. The appellants contested the said petition on the basis that the Transport Undertaking was a separate autonomous body and the employees of the Transport Undertaking had separate set of Pension Rules and they cannot claim parity in the pension with the employees of the Pune Municipal Corporation. The High Court, however, took the view that the employees of the Transport Undertaking are also employees of the Municipal Corporation; that they are entitled to the same benefits which have been granted to the employees of the Pune Municipal Corporation; that therefore, allowed the writ petitions and directed the extension of the benefits of the Revised Pension Scheme to respondents 2 to 5. The Corporation was also directed to extend the benefits of the said Scheme to the employees of the Transport Undertaking who had retired after 1-4-1957 including respondents Nos. 1, 6 and 7.;