The Supreme Court has dismissed a challenge filed by K. Suman Chandra, a retired Professor of the National Institute of Rural Development (NIRD), who sought pensionary benefits under the General Provident Fund-cum-Pension Scheme (GPF) instead of the Central Pension Fund Scheme (CPF).
A Bench comprising Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar pronounced the judgment on August 20, 2026.
The Court held that the petitioner’s case was materially similar to an earlier case concerning another NIRD professor and found no reason to reopen the issue.
Background of the Case
K. Suman Chandra initially joined NIRD as a Research Associate on a contractual basis in November 1984. His services were later regularised, and he subsequently served as Assistant Director, Deputy Director and Professor.
His services as Professor were regularised through Office Order No. 98 dated May 4, 2012. The order specifically stated that the regularisation would take effect from the date of the order and that his services would continue to be governed by the existing CPF Scheme.
After retiring on January 31, 2017, Chandra received his retiral benefits, including the NIRD contribution towards his CPF account. He later approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), seeking GPF coverage.
The CAT initially allowed his plea, but the Telangana High Court subsequently set aside that order.
Supreme Court’s Observation
The Supreme Court examined its earlier decision in the case concerning Shyam Sunder Prasad Sharma, whose services had also been regularised under the same Office Order dated May 4, 2012.
The Court noted that the earlier judgment had held that regularisation operated from May 4, 2012, rather than from the employee’s initial appointment, and that the employee remained covered under the CPF Scheme.
The Bench observed:
“Having accepted the terms and conditions for regularisation of services on the post of Professor and the grievance in this regard having been raised post-retirement after accepting benefits under the CPF Scheme, the petitioner was rightly non-suited by the High Court.”
The Court further found that the petitioner and Sharma had been regularised under identical conditions and that the terms of regularisation had not been challenged by either employee at the relevant time.
Decision
The Supreme Court held that the earlier ruling in National Institute of Rural Development v. Shyam Sunder Prasad Sharma and Others applied equally to Chandra’s case.
The Bench stated that there was no reason to exercise jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition.
Case Details
Case Title: K. Suman Chandra v. Union of India and Others
Case Number: Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. of 2026 (@ Diary No. 5679 of 2024)
Judge: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar
Decision Date: August 20, 2026
 and Railway Protection Special Force (RPSF) Constables-300x169.webp)
