Bombay High Court

SHUBHANGI CHANDRAKANT JOSHIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court held that the petitioners, appointed before 01/11/2005, remain governed by the Old Pension Scheme and are entitled to its benefits, rendering deductions under the DCPS or NPS unlawful.

Summary

The petitioners, Shubhangi Chandrakant Joshi and Vaishali Ramchandra Naik, who were appointed as Assistant Teachers before 1 November 2005, challenged the State of Maharashtra's deduction of pension contributions under the Defined Contribution Pension Scheme (DCPS) and National Pension Scheme (NPS). They contended that they should remain governed by the Old Pension Scheme as per the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982 and the Maharashtra Civil Services (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1984. The High Court referred to its earlier decision in Writ Petition No.9865/2023 and found that the petitioners are indeed covered by the old scheme. Consequently, the Court ordered that the State must not deduct any amount under DCPS/NPS, must extend the benefits of the old pension scheme, and must refund any amounts already deducted with interest. The writ petitions were therefore allowed in accordance with the prayer clauses B, C, and D.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioners appointed before 01/11/2005 are governed by the Old Pension Scheme under the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982 and the Maharashtra Civil Services (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1984.
Whether the State's deduction of pension contributions under the Defined Contribution Pension Scheme (DCPS) or National Pension Scheme (NPS) is lawful for such petitioners.
Whether the State is required to refund the amounts deducted under DCPS/NPS with interest.

Legislation cited

Subjects

old pension scheme
defined contribution pension scheme
national pension scheme
mandamus
refund with interest
civil service pension
state employee benefits

Judgment

                                   *1*                         31-wp-12136-2026


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                 31 WRIT PETITION NO. 12136 OF 2026

                  Shubhangi Chandrakant Joshi
                            VERSUS
  The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others
                               ...
Mr. Arvind G. Ambetkar, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. N. D. Batule, AGP for Respondents/State
                               …
                              AND
            59 WRIT PETITION NO. 12166 OF 2026

                   Vaishali Ramchandra Naik
                            VERSUS
  The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others
                               ...
Mr. Arvind G. Ambetkar, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. V. M. Kagne, AGP for Respondents/State
                               …
                  CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI &
                             ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
                  DATE : 16th SEPTEMBER 2026

P. C. :-

1.         The issue raised in these petitions is squarely covered by

the decision of this Court in Writ Petition No.9865 /2023.

2.         For the reasons stated in the said order, Writ Petitions are

allowed in terms of prayer clauses ‘B’, ‘C’ and ‘D’, which read

thus :-

     “B) By issuing a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or
     directions in the like nature, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
     to hold and declare that, the petitioner is governed under the Old
     Pension Scheme i.e. Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982

Narwade
                                   *2*                          31-wp-12136-2026


    and Maharashtra Civil Services (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1984
    and General Provident Fund, which are applicable to the Assistant
    Teachers, who are appointed prior to 01/11/2005.

    C) By issuing a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or directions
    in the like nature this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the
    respondents to extend/release the benefits under the old pension
    scheme to the petitioner and shall not deduct any amount from the
    salary of the petitioner by applying the Defined Contribution Pension
    Scheme (DCPS) or National Pension Scheme (NPS).

    D) By issuing a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or directions
    in the like nature this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the
    respondents to refund the deducted amount of the petitioner with
    interest by applying the DCPS or NPS by respondents, within a period
    of four weeks.”



(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.)                 (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)




Narwade

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…