O R D E R
By Akhil Kumar Srivastava, Member (J). The applicants are the employees of Bhopal Memorial Hospital & Research Centre (BMHRC) working of different posts. They are seeking direction to count their past services rendered in the same establishment for the purpose of pensionary benefits and other service benefits.
2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that initially the Bhopal Memorial Hospital Trust was established in terms of the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the year 1998 with Hon'ble Justice A.M. Ahmadi (former CJI) as its Chairman. The Trust was established to serve the gas victims and to provide them medical treatment free of cost.
2.1 Subsequently, in compliance of the order dated 19.07.2010 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Central Government took steps to wind up the trust and run the Hospital and consequently, the Department of Biotechnology and Department of Atomic Energy, Government of India jointly took over the management from the Trust on 01.09.2020. Thereafter, BMHRC was transferred to the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) under the Department of Health Research, Ministry of Health &
Page 25 of 38
Family Welfare on 29.01.2013 consequent to which, the benefits of 6thCPC were extended to the employees of the BMHRC.
2.2 The issue of revision of pay scale in respect of the 19 categories of post of BMHRC was consulted with the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Finance vide communication dated 03.08.2018 (Annexure A-3) had turned down the demand with the following reasons:
"(i) BMHRC was taken over by the Government of India only on
19.07.2010.
(ii) Prior to 19.07.2010, it was a private Trust.
(iii) The services rendered in a private organization are not counted for any purpose in the Government apart from calculation of experience."
2.3 In pursuance to the said communication, the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Department of Health Research vide communication dated 31.08.2015 (Page 82 of the Paper Book) had instructed the ICMR to send additional information/clarification required by Ministry of Finance regarding review/restructuring of pay scale in respect of 19 categories of posts in BMHRC.
Page 26 of 38
2.4 However, vide the order dated 06.10.2025 (Annexure A-4), it has been decided that the issues related to BMHRC shall be dealt with directly by the Department of Health Research and not by Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR). As per this, the BMHRC is under exclusive control of the Department of Health Research.
2.5 The employees of the BMHRC have made the request time and again for counting their past service rendered in the Bhopal Memorial Hospital Trust for various benefits viz; pension, gratuity, promotion etc. However, nothing has been heard till date.
2.6 At the time of management of BMHRC by the Bhopal Memorial Hospital Trust, contributory pension was applicable and the same has been continued till now. Consequent to the grant of 6thCPC to the employees of BMHRC w.e.f.01.09.2010, the scale of pay of employees has been revised but the deduction on account of pension is still being done.
3. Reply has been filed on behalf of respondents Nos.1, 2 & 4 stating that nomenclature of the post and the pay scales being paid to the employees by the Trust were different than the one prevailing in the Central Government departments. After the Hospital was taken over by the Department of
Page 27 of 38
Atomic Energy and then by the Department of Health Research, it was required to undertake the exercise of fixing pay scales of employees in appropriate Pay Scales and Grade Pay of Central Government. It was, therefore, decided to scrutinize individual cases based on eligibility conditions viz. qualification, experience and age limit etc. vis-à-vis the service rules and pay scales prevalent in Central Government/ICMR. Accordingly, order, dated 19.7.2012, (Annexure A-2) was issued by ICMR with the approval of Government of India for grant of 6thCPC scales of pay to different categories of posts in BMHRC. It was directed that the fixation of pay in 6th CPC pay scales shall be done with reference to Section II, Part A of 1st Schedule of Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008.
3.1 The applicants never raised any grievance before the Government with regard to counting of their past services rendered with the Trust. It is, therefore, specifically denied that the employees of BMHRC have made various demands in this regard. No such representation has been brought on record by the applicants. The notice of strike referred to in Annexure A/6 does not relate to employees' demand for counting their past service. It was in fact with regard to grant of financial benefits particularly 6thCPC which was redressed by the Government vide order, dated 19.07.2012. The
Page 28 of 38
Government took the decision about not counting past services only in August' 2015 and, therefore, raising of demand in this regard does not arise.
3.2 No financial loss is caused to any of the employee. The applicants have not disclosed as to which benefit that was available to them in Trust has not been conferred on them after taking over of Hospital by the Government. It may be pertinent to mention that employees in the Trust were working either as Contract Employees or Temporary Employees (for short tenure) ог Causal/ad-hoc employee. After the Hospital was taken over by the Govt. of India, the status of the Contract and Temporary employees was changed to regular employees in the Government. Therefore, all these employees are beneficiaries of the decision of the Govt. of India so far as terms and conditions of service as well as security of service are concerned.
4. The applicants have also filed rejoinder to the reply filed by the respondents stating that they are claiming the consideration of their past services for service related benefits such as grant of pensionary benefits, increments, promotions and all these avenues are matters which are continuous in nature and therefore, the claim of the applicants is on account of a continuous cause of action.
Page 29 of 38
4.1 So far as the status i.e. whether the Bhopal Memorial Hospital Trust was a private or public trust is concerned, the applicants have stated that the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 03.10.1991, as part of settlement pursuant to the Union Carbide gas disaster, had directed the Union Carbide Corporation to build a 500 bed hospital with the best services and equipment for treatment of the survivors of the disaster and the provision of medical surveillance and expert medical care for them pursuant to the settlement with Union Carbide Corporation and Union Carbide India Limited. In pursuance of the order dated 03.10.1991 (Annexure A-9), Union Carbide Corporation on 20.03.1992 established a charitable Trust called the Bhopal Hospital Trust. It was later on vide order dated 14.02.1994, the Hon'ble Supreme Court directed that the Government of India shall constitute an appropriate committee to take steps for the planning, construction, equipping and commissioning of the Hospital, for treatment of the gas victims. The Bhopal Memorial Trust was finally set up on 11.08.1998. The Trust was in receipt of Government aids and grants and the Trustees of the Trust were persons holding offices in the Government machinery and also that the formation, functioning and management of the Trust was all at the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
Page 30 of 38
4.2 The applicants were inducted into service in consonance with the Bhopal Memorial Hospital Trust, Bhopal Service Rules and Standing Orders. The initial appointment of the applicants is between 2000 to 2004. However, their date of induction has not been taken into account for service related benefits.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings and the documents available on record.
6. It is not in dispute that the establishment of Bhopal Memorial Hospital Trust was done in compliance of the directives of Hon'ble Supreme Court in 1998 so as to serve the victims of Bhopal Gas Tragedy and general public and to provide them medical treatment free of cost. Thereafter, the Bhopal Memorial Hospital Trust was taken over by the Central Government in pursuance to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos.3187-3188 of 1988 dated 19.07.2010, wherein the Central Government was directed to take appropriate steps after winding up the Trust. On 01.09.2010, Department of Biotechnology and Atomic Energy jointly took over the management and thereafter on 29.01.2012, the BMHRC was
Page 31 of 38
transferred to the ICMR under the Department of Health Research, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare.
7. Apparently, in the year 2015, the Ministry of Finance had not agreed to the proposal of review/restructuring of pay scales in respect of 19 categories of posts of BMHRC. However, vide the communication dated 31.08.2015 (Annexure A-3), the Department of Health Research had requested the ICMR to send additional information as required by the Ministry of Finance regarding review/restructuring of pay scale in respect of those 19 categories of posts in BMHRC. There is nothing on record to suggest as to what action has been taken in furtherance to the communication dated 31.08.2015 of the Department of Health Research as the grievance of the employees of BMHRC have yet not been redressed.
8. The Office Order dated 22.04.2016 (Annexure A-5) issued by the Department of Health Research clearly says to place the administrative and legal control of the BMHRC directly under the Department of Health Research w.e.f.11.09.2015. As such, the Department of Health Research is answerable to deal with the issues related to the BMHRC.
Page 32 of 38
9. It is also not in dispute that prior to 2010, the BMHRC was private trust and came under the Government of India on 19.07.2010. But at the same time, it cannot be ignored that the Bhopal Memorial Hospital Trust was a public autonomous Trust chaired by retired CJI accompanied by the senior dignitaries of Central Government and State Government including Director of AIIMS, New Delhi.
10. The issue regarding counting of services of absorbed employees of the Trust has been considered and decided by the Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Municipal Corporation, Gwalior vs. Ramsewak, 2002 (2) MPLJ 148, Thakur Prasad Mishra vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & others, WP No.14760 of 2007 (S) decided on 26.08.2009, Raj Kumar Jain vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & others, WP No.14746 of 2012 decided on 10.09.2012, R.R. Gehlot vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, WP No.6176 of 2006 (s) decided on 10.11.2010 in which it was held to count the services rendered under the Trust for the purpose of calculation of qualifying service for pension. The cases cited above, have further been referred in the order dated 08.02.2016 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur in WPS No.4459 of 2014 & other connected matters,
Page 33 of 38
reliance of which placed by learned counsel for the applicants during the course of argument. The operative paragraphs of the order dated 08.02.2016 read as under:
"10. While allowing the writ petition preferred by R.R. Gehlot, bearing No.6176 of 2006 (S), the Madhya Pradesh High Court has held thus:
In the present case it is an admitted fact that the petitioner was an employee of Town by State Improvement Trust a body constituted under the provisions of M.P. Nagar Sudhar Nyas Adhiniyam, 1960, a body owned and controlled by the State Government. The Town Improvement Trusts were abolished by the State Government and a notification was published in the official gazette on 10th June, 1994. The petitioner was absorbed in the services of Municipal Corporation, Ratlam w.e.f. 01.08.1994. This Court has carefully gone through the order dt. 06.01.1999 passed the Government and the aforesaid order reveals that the employees absorbed in the service of local bodies were granted seniority by taking into account their past service. Thus, the petitioner, was also assigned seniority and other benefits flowing out of the seniority for the services rendered by him with Town Improvement Trust, Ratlam. Learned counsel for the respondent Municipal Corporation has vehemently argued before this Court that the Regional, Dy. Director Local Self Government vide letter dt. 05.02.1988 has held that employees absorbed in the services of local bodies will not be entitled for the past services and they will be entitled only for the benefit of contributory provident fund. Letter of the Dy. Director will certainly not supersede the order issued by the State Government and once the decision was taken by the State Government to grant benefit of the past services there appears to be no justification in depriving the petitioner in the matter of grant of benefit of the past services rendered by him with Town Improvement Trust which is certainly a body owned and controlled by the State Government. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon a Division Bench judgment delivered in the case of Municipal Corporation Gwalior and another v. Ramsewak, 2002 2 MPLJ 148 and his contention is that in a similar situation an employee serving Gram Panchayat was absorbed in the services of Municipal Corporation and the benefit of past services were extended by the Division Bench of this
Page 34 of 38
Court vide order dt. 29.10.2001. This Court has carefully gone through the aforesaid judgment delivered int eh case of Municipal Corporation Gwalior v. Ramsewak and the employee therein was working in a Gram Panchayat and after his absorption in the services of Municipal Corporation, Gwalior the benefit of past services have been extended by Division Bench of this Court. In the present case the petitioner was also working under an organization owned and controlled by the State Government and the State in its own wisdom has taken a decision on 14.09.1989 to extend the benefit of past service for other purpose and the respondents have also granted gratuity to the petitioner by taking into account the services rendered by the petitioner from 07.08.1965. Resultantly this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is certainly entitled for the benefit of past service in the matter of computing the qualifying services for grant of pension. However, as the petitioner has already received the CPF, the petitioner shall refund the entire amount of CPF to the respondents within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and thereafter respondents after receiving the aforesaid amount shall revise pension case of the petitioner by taking into account the date of initial appointment i.e. 7-8-1965 and shall release the pension of the petitioner along with arrears of pension within 6 months of the receipt of the certified copy of this order.
11. The said judgment rendered by the Single Bench was affirmed by the Division Bench in Municipal Corporation, Ratlam (supra). Thereafter the Municipal Corporation, Ratlam preferred SLP No.34485/2012, which was dismissed vide order dated 26.11.2012 in the following terms:-
This petition is directed against the order of the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court whereby the writ appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed and the direction given by the learned Single Judge for payment of pension to the respondent by taking into consideration his total service was upheld.
We have heard Shri Siddhartha Luthra, learned Additional Solicitor General and perused the record. In response to the Court's query, the learned Additional Solicitor General fairly stated that Municipal Corporations of Gwalior and Indore did not challenge the orders passed by the Division Bench of the High Court in the cases of Ramsewak and Bhupendra Kumar Puranik, whereby direction was given for payment of pension to them by treating their total length of
Page 35 of 38
service as qualifying service. He, however, argued that the impugned judgment is liable to be set aside because the order of absorption of respondent No.1 did not postulate computation of previous service as part of qualifying service.
In our opinion, there is no merit in the argument of the learned Additional Solicitor General. It is not in dispute that the service rendered by respondent No.1 in Town Improvement Trust, Ratlam was added to the service rendered after absorption for the purpose of fixation of seniority, etc. Therefore, there is no plausible reason for not counting that service for the purpose of computation of pension. With the above observation the special leave petition is dismissed. The petitioner is directed to implement the direction given by the learned Single Judge within a period of three months and submit a report to this effect in the Registry of the High Court.
A copy of this order be sent to respondent No.1 by registered post at the address mentioned in the memo of special leave petition.
12. In view of the above, the present petitions being similar, all the writ petitions succeed. The respondents are directed to count the past services rendered by the petitioners under the SADA, Korba or SADA, Bhilai, as the case may be, for the purposes of computing the qualifying service for grant of pension."
11. Rule 14 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 read with Office Memorandum dated 03.12.1977 (Annexure IA-3 filed along with MA No.1670/2025 for taking additional documents on record) provides that the past services rendered in an autonomous body taken over by the Central Government are to be counted as qualifying service. The relevant extract of the Office Memorandum dated 03.12.1977 is reproduced below:
"(2) Counting of service rendered in Central Government autonomous bodies before their take-over by Central Government. - 1. A question has
Page 36 of 38
been raised whether the service rendered in the Central Government autonomous bodies prior to their being take over by the Central Government and who later on joined the service under the Central Government with or without break, can be allowed to be counted towards pension under the Central Government rules. At present service rendered in the Central Government autonomous bodies which are taken over by the Central Government is allowed to be counted towards pension only in respect of those employees of the Central autonomous bodies who were in the service of those bodies at the time of their being taken over by the Central Government, subject to the condition that the retirement benefits, if any, available to the employees in respect of the service rendered in the autonomous body are made over to the Central Government. The service rendered in the autonomous body in respect of those employees who were not in position at the time of the take-over of the bodies by the Central Government is not allowed to be counted towards pension."
12. The subsequent Office Memorandum dated 29.08.1984 (Annexure IA-
4) issued by the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms deals with mobility of counting of service for pension of personnel between Central Government Departments and Autonomous Bodies. This Office Memorandum inter alia states as under:
"3.(b) Autonomous body where the Pension Scheme is not in operation.
(i) A permanent Central Government employee borne on pensionable establishment, on absorption under such autonomous body will be eligible for pro-rata retirement benefits in accordance with the provisions of the Ministry of Finance O.M. No.26(18)EV(B)/75 dated the 8th April, 1976, as amended from time to time. In case of quasi-permanent or temporary employees, the terminal gratuity as may be admissible under the rules would be actually payable to the individual on the date when pro-rata retirement benefits to permanent employees become payable. However, in the case of absorption of a Government employee with CPF benefits, in such an autonomous organisation, the amount of his subscriptions and the
Page 37 of 38
Governments' contribution, if any, together with interest thereon shall be transferred to his new Provident Fund account with the consent of that body. (ⅱ) An employee of an autonomous body on permanent absorption under the Central Government will have the option either to receive CPF benefits which have accrued to him from the autonomous body and start his service afresh in Government or choose to count service rendered in that body as qualifying service for pension in Government by foregoing employer's share of Contributory Provident Fund contributions with interest thereon, which will be paid to the concerned Government Department by the autonomous body. The option shall be exercised within one year from the date of absorption. If no option is exercised within stipulated period, employee shall be deemed to have opted to receive CPF benefits. The option once exercised shall be final.
(c) Absorption of employees of one Central Autonomous body to another Central Autonomous body. The above procedure will be followed mutates mutandis in respect of employees going from one autonomous body to another.
4. "Central autonomous body" means body which is financed wholly or substantially from cess or Central Government grants. " Substantially"
means that more than 50% of the expenditure of an autonomous body is met through cess or Central Government grants. Autonomous body includes a Central statutory body or a Central University but does not include a public undertaking."
13. It has not been disputed by the respondents that the applicants were engaged in the Bhopal Memorial Hospital Trust between the years 2000 and 2004 and they were very much in service in the year 2010 when the Central Government had taken over the Bhopal Memorial Hospital Trust. Therefore, in view of the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur in WPS No.4459 of 2014 (supra) coupled with the Office Memorandums quoted above, we are of the considered view that the
Page 38 of 38
services of the applicants under the Bhopal Memorial Hospital Trust are to be counted for the purposes of computing the qualifying service for grant of pension.
14. So far as the other issues with respect to counting of service towards seniority and promotion from the date of initial engagement of the applicants, we observe that since all these issues are yet to be dealt with by the administrative Ministry, i.e. Department of Health Research, we expect that the said Ministry will take a decision in this matter as expeditiously as possible but not later than six months, as observed by us in this order.
15. In the result, this Original Application is partly allowed. We direct the respondents to count the past services rendered by the applicants under the Bhopal Memorial Hospital Trust for the purposes of computing the qualifying service for grant of pension along with arrears and issue necessary orders in this regard, within a period of 120 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. (Mallika Arya) (Akhil Kumar Srivastava)
Administrative Member Judicial Member
am/-