UTI RETIRED AND VSS EMPLOYEES SOCIAL ASSOCIATIONversusUNIT TRUST OF INDIA ASSET MANAGEMENT CO. PVT. LTD.

                                                                                          30 WP 1461-16.DOC



LAXMI                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SUBHASH
SONTAKKE                            ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
Digitally signed by
LAXMI SUBHASH
SONTAKKE
Date: 2026.01.21
15:17:20 +0530                            WRIT PETITION NO. 1461 OF 2016
                                                      WITH
                                          WRIT PETITION NO. 1185 OF 2008
                                                      WITH
                                       INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 116 OF 2025
                                                       IN
                                          WRIT PETITION NO. 1185 OF 2008


                      UTI Retired And VSS Employees Social Association        ...Petitioner
                           Versus
                      UTI Asset Management Company Ltd. & Anr.         ...Respondents
                                                        WITH
                                         WRIT PETITION NO. 227 OF 2021
                                                        WITH
                                     INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 6948 OF 2025
                                                          IN
                                         WRIT PETITION NO. 227 OF 2021

                      All India UTI AMC Officers Association                      ...Petitioner
                             Vs
                      Union of India                                              ...Respondent

                                                        _______
                      Mr. Rajaram Bansode a/w Sheetal Ubale for Petitioner in WP/1185/2008 and WP
                      1461/2016
                      Adv. C. S. Zende for the Petitioner in WP/227/2021 and for the Applicant in
                      IA/6948/25.
                      Mr. Sudhir Talsania, Senior Advocate a/w Vishal Talsania, Heena Shaikh i/b. M. V.
                      Kini & Co. for Respondent No.1 in WP/1461/2015.
                      Mr. Sudhir Tasania, Senior Advocate a/w Vishal Talsania i/b. Jigar Kamdar for
                      Respondent No.1. in WP/227/2021 and WP/1185/2021.
                      Mr. Vishal Talsania i/b. V. M. Parker for the proposed Respondent in IA/116/2025
                      & IA/6948/2025.
                                                          _______




                                                       Page 1 of 4
                      Laxmi
                                                                             30 WP 1461-16.DOC



                                  CORAM:       G. S. KULKARNI &
                                               AARTI SATHE, JJ.

                                  DATE:        17th JANUARY 2026

P.C.

                        WRIT PETITION NO. 1461 OF 2016

1.      This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying

for the following substantive reliefs:-



        “a) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to declare that the action of the
        management of the erstwhile UTI and of the management of the
        Respondent Company of not providing fresh opportunity to exercise
        the option for pension to the employees including the members of the
        Petitioner since 2001 on revision of their pay scales and allowances, is
        illegal and bad in law.


        b) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus
        under Article 226 of The Constitution of India or any other order or
        writ in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the management of
        the Respondent Company to forthwith provide fresh opportunity to
        exercise the option for pension under the Pension Regulations, 1994
        to the all the members of the Petitioner who have become members of
        the Petitioner subsequent to the filing of the Writ Petition No. 1185 of
        2008.

        c) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus
        under Article 226 of The Constitution of India or any other order or
        writ in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the management of
        the Respondent Company to release forthwith the arrears of pension
        due to all the members of the Petitioner who have become members
        of the Petitioner subsequent to the filing of the Writ Petition No. 1185
        of 2008 from their respective date of voluntary separation / retirement
        with 12% interest p.a. or at an appropriate lower rate of interest in


                                      Page 2 of 4
Laxmi
                                                                           30 WP 1461-16.DOC



        view of the current interest rate scenario and to continue to pay the
        monthly pension to all the members of the Petitioner on exercising the
        option of pension by the members.”



2.          At the outset, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Respondent No.1

UTI Asset Management Company Ltd. would submit that the Petition itself is not

maintainable against Respondent No.1-UTI Asset Management Company Ltd. as

Respondent No.1UTI Asset Management Company Ltd. is not a ‘State’ under

Article 12 of the Constitution of India. To support his submission, our attention is

drawn to the decision in the case of Mukesh Kapoor and Others Vs. Union of India

and Another (in Writ Petition No. 6512 of 2021) dated 20th June 2022.


3.          The basic issue which was considered by the Court in the said decision

was as to whether Respondent No.1 UTI Asset Management Company Ltd. falls

within the meaning of ‘State’ under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. After

examining all the relevant parameters applicable for such determination, the Court

concluded that Respondent No. 1 does not qualify as “State” or “other authority”

under Article 12 of the Constitution. Consequently, the objection raised by the

Respondents regarding the maintainability of the Petition was required to be

upheld.

4.      In view of the above, no writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

could be issued against an entity that does not fall within the definition of “State.”

However, considering that the present Petitions have been pending for a

considerable period of time and that there has been an intervening development in

the law, the Petitioners are permitted to pursue such other appropriate remedy as


                                     Page 3 of 4
Laxmi
                                                                        30 WP 1461-16.DOC



may be available in law, if so advised.

5.      Any such proceedings shall be initiated within a period of two months from

today. The Petitioners shall be entitled to the benefit of Section 14 of the

Limitation Act. All contentions of the parties in any future proceedings are

expressly kept open.

6.      Accordingly, the Petitions stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

7.      In view of the disposal of the Petitions, nothing survives in the above

Interim Applications, and the same are also disposed of, keeping open all

contentions of the parties.




        (AARTI SATHE, J.)                         (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)




                                    Page 4 of 4
Laxmi