Date of reserved for orders Date of pronouncement Date of uploading APHC010450932022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH TUESDAY, THE 14 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 27638/2022 BETWEEN: 1. PORT TRUST STAFF ASSOCIATION VISAKHAPATNAM, REP BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, K. PRABHAKAR RAO, S/o. LATE K. SAMBA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 72 EMPLOYEE, VISAKHAPATNAM. 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF SHIPPING, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TRANSPORTS BHAVAN, NEW DELHI. 2. THE CHAIRMAN, VISAKHAPATNAM PORT TRUST, VISAKHAPATNAM. Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order direction more particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring th there is no separate pension regulation formulate by the 2nd respondent organization only following CCS Pension Rules but the 1st respondent by violating rule 8 and 9 of CCS Pension Rules vide letter No.A 38011/2/2018-PE-1 dt- per New Pension Scheme the family pension to the employee covered under New Pension Scheme was withdrawn/stopped the family for the last 7 months as the 2nd respondent organization is as Autonomous Body which is as illegal, improper and arbitrary. Consequently by setting aside proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 11 consequently by restore the family pension who are entitled and to pass such other order or orders. Date of reserved for orders : 09.07.2026 Date of pronouncement : 14.07.2026 : 17.07.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE 14th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 27638/2022 PORT TRUST STAFF ASSOCIATION VISAKHAPATNAM, REP BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, K. PRABHAKAR RAO, S/o. LATE K. SAMBA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, OCC EMPLOYEE, VISAKHAPATNAM. ...PETITIONER AND THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF SHIPPING, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TRANSPORTS BHAVAN, NEW DELHI. THE CHAIRMAN, VISAKHAPATNAM PORT TRUST, VISAKHAPATNAM. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order direction more particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent, when there is no separate pension regulation formulate by the 2nd respondent organization only following CCS Pension Rules but the 1st respondent by violating rule 8 and 9 of CCS Pension Rules vide letter No.A - 11.09.2020 communicated to 2nd respondent as per New Pension Scheme the family pension to the employee covered under New Pension Scheme was withdrawn/stopped the family for the last 7 months as the 2nd respondent organization is as Autonomous Body which is as illegal, improper and arbitrary. Consequently by setting aside proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 11-09-2020 and declared as void consequently by restore the family pension who are entitled and to pass ch other order or orders. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3330] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO PORT TRUST STAFF ASSOCIATION VISAKHAPATNAM, REP BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, K. PRABHAKAR RAO, S/o. LATE K. YEARS, OCC- RETIRED ...PETITIONER THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF SHIPPING, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY THE CHAIRMAN, VISAKHAPATNAM PORT TRUST, ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order direction more particularly a writ in the e action of the 1st respondent, when there is no separate pension regulation formulate by the 2nd respondent organization only following CCS Pension Rules but the 1st respondent by violating rule 8 and 9 of CCS Pension Rules vide letter No.A- 11.09.2020 communicated to 2nd respondent as per New Pension Scheme the family pension to the employee covered under New Pension Scheme was withdrawn/stopped the family for the last 7 months as the 2nd respondent organization is as Autonomous Body which is as illegal, improper and arbitrary. Consequently by setting aside 2020 and declared as void consequently by restore the family pension who are entitled and to pass 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A PADMA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. Y V ANIL KUMAR (Central Government Counsel) 2. P SRI RAM The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “…..to issue a writ order, direction more particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent, when there is no separate pension regulation formulate by the 2ndrespondent organization only following CCS Pension Rules but the 1st respondent by violating rule 8 and 9 of CCS Pension Rules vide letter No.A-38011/2/2018- PE-1 dt. 11.09.2020 communicated to 2nd respondent as per New Pension Scheme the family pension to the employee covered under New Pension Scheme was withdrawn/stopped the family for the last 7 months as the 2nd respondent organisation is as Autonomous Body which is as illegal, improper and arbitrary. Consequently by setting aside proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 11.09.2020 and declared as viodconsequently by restore the family pension who are entitled and to pass such other order or orders….. 2. It is asserted in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition that the Ministry of Finance, Government of India issued O.M. 517/2003- ECB2PR dt, 22.12.2003. In terms of the proceedings, the old pension scheme has been closed, new pension scheme has been came into effect from 01.01.2004 which is new pension scheme made applicable to all the Major Ports. While so, the Ministry of Public Grievance and Pensions, Department of Pensioners Welfare has issued proceeding vide OM No.38/41/06 P&PW(A) dt 05.05.2009. As per the said proceedings the 4 authorities were granted certain additional benefits to the families of Government Servants covered under by the new Contribution Pension System (New Pension Scheme). As per the term of the new scheme, who died while he was in service since 01.01.2004 on Provisional basis, though the pension department issued Office Memorandum dt.05.05.2009, which is not directly applicable to the port employees. Hence, the matter was referred to 1st respondent O.M. dated 05.05.2009, and also contended that, to examine and issue orders OM dated 05.05.2009 is applicable to port sector for extending the benefit of family pension to the families of such employees who have appointed on after 01.01.2004 covered new defined contribution pension system and died while in service since 01.01.2004 in terms of Rule 54 and Rule 50 CCS pension rules. 3. It is further asserted that employees appointed on or after 01.01.2004 covered by the New Defined Contribution Pension System (New Pension Scheme) who are discharged on invalidation/disablement and by the families of such employees who died during service since 01.01.2004 by adopting the DOPPW'S Office Memorandum No. 3B/41/06/P&PW(A) dated 05.05.2009 issued by the Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Pension and Pensioners Welfare The Board of Trustees in the meeting held on 04.02.2016 vide Agenda item No.S6, Resolution No. 211/2015-16 approved for extending the said benefit granted under DOPPW's O M, No 3B/41/106/P&PW(A) 5 dated 05.05.2009. Accordingly, the 1st respondent herein also been informed vide letter dated 16.02.2016, that Board has adopted the DOPPW's O M dated 05.05.2009 and all the eligible cases were being processed and settled. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1 submitted that, the New Pension Scheme (now renamed National Pension System) was introduced for new entrants to Govt. service w.e.f. 01.01.2004 vide Govt. Notification dated 22.12.2003. Vide Ministry of Finance's OM dated 13.11.2003 the same was extended to new entrants in all Autonomous Bodies under various Central Ministries/Departments recruited on or after 01.01.2004. Accordingly, vide Ministry of Ports, 2004, NPS was made Shipping & Waterways' O.M. dated 08.09.2004, NPS was made applicable for the employees recruited in Major Ports on or after 01.01.2004. Initially, the benefits of Disability Pension and Family Pension were not available to Government servants covered under NPS. To provide relief to such pensioners, the Department of Pension & Pensioners' Welfare (DoPPW) vide its OM No. 38/41/06/P&PW(A) dated 05.05.2009 (Exhibit I), granted additional relief to be provided on death or discharge on invalidation/ disability of a Government servant covered by NPS on a provisional basis. However, the aforementioned Order dated 05.05.2009 is only applicable to government servants and not to employees of autonomous bodies. This is a decision that has been taken with the larger perspective. Accordingly, 6 vide letter dated 11.09.2020 (Exhibit II), it was conveyed to all Major Port Trusts that it is not possible at this stage to adopt DoPPW's OM dated 05.05.2009 for the employees of Major Ports covered under NPS. 5. It is further submitted that the Board of Trustees of VPA does not have the authority to extend Central Government benefits to Port employees without the express permission of the administrative Ministry. In the case of NPS, Gol has issued separate Orders for bringing autonomous bodies under the purview of NPS as well as for extending subsequent benefits related to NPS such as the enhancement of employers' contribution to 14%, to autonomous body employees. Therefore, since Gol issues common Orders pertaining to the application of NPS to autonomous bodies, it is not upto the individual administrative Ministry to take a separate decision regarding the in this regard. 6. It is further stated that, to streamline the implementation of NPS, vide DoPPW's notification dated 30.03.2021 separate service rules were issued for NPS employees, i.e. CCS(INPS), Rules, 2021. However, Rule 10 of the CCS(INPS) Rules has not been made applicable to employees of autonomous bodies. It is submitted that as per Rule 10, every government servant covered under NPS shall, at the time of joining Govt. service, exercise an option for availing benefits under the National Pension System or under the Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1972 or the Central Civil Service (Extraordinary Pension) Rules, 1939 in the event of his death 7 or boarding out on account of disablement or retirement on invalidation. However, since this Rule is not applicable to Central Autonomous bodies, therefore such an option cannot be allowed to Major Port employees covered under NPS. 7. Learned counsel for the 2nd respondent reiterated the counter averments. In the counter it is sated that, in view of letter dated 02.11.2015 that addressed by the Respondent No. 1, the matter was placed before the Board for approval for extending the benefit of family pension computed in terms of Rules 54 and death gratuity computed in terms of Rule 50 of the Central Civil Service (Pension Rules, 1972) on provisional basis for the employees appointed on or after 01.01.2004 covered under New Defined Contribution Pension System (New Pension Scheme) who are discharged on invalidation/disablement and by the families of such employees who have died during the service since 01.01.2004 by adopting the DoP&PW Office Memorandum No. 38/41/06/P&PW (A) dated 05.05.2009 and Resolution No. 211/2015-16. Thereafter, the same was communicated to Respondent No. 1 vide letter dated 16.02.2016, that the Board has adopted the said O.M dated 05.05.2009 and all the cases are being processed and settled accordingly. 8. It is further submitted that as per Clause 7 of DoP & PW Office Memorandam bearing No. 38/41/06/P&PW (A) dated 05.05.2009, the recommendations of High Level Task Force (HL 11) envisages payment of 8 various benefits on death/discharge of a Government employee after adjustment of the monthly annuitized pension from the accumulated funds in the NPS account of the employee. Therefore, no payment of monthly- annuitised pension will be made to the family of the employee during the period he/she is in receipt of the provisional benefits. 9. On careful reading of the affidavit, the chronology of dates and events which have been succinctly referred does not indicate when the petitioners were joined in the service and when they were retired from the service. The amended rule-2 that only indicates or outlines that a benefit of “invalid Pension/Disability Pension and Family Pension/Extraordinary Family Pension/Liberalised Pensionary Award” relief are not available to the government servants appointed on or after 01.01.2004. The employees who are appointed after 01.01.2004, are not entitled for pensions referred above and they are only entitled for Contribution Pension System (New Pension Scheme) as amended vide O.M. No. 38/41/06/P&W(A) dated 05.05.2009. This does not imply that employees appointed on or before 01.01.2004 are automatically eligible for Contribution Pension System (New Pension Scheme) as amended vide O.M. No: 38/41/06/P&W(A) dated 05.05.2009. The affidavit is silent or specify the appointment dates of the petitioners, and in the absence of this information, the Court cannot draw any conclusions. Since the petitioners have not indicated their appointment dates, relief cannot be granted. The 9 writ petition is devoid of merit and accordingly it stands dismissed. However there shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 14.07.2026 Harin Whether the order is: Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No 10 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO W.P.No. 27638 of 2022 Date: 14-07-2026 Harin