The Meghalaya College Teachers’ Association (MCTA) has challenged the state Education Department’s claim that teachers proposed the 2023 Draft Pension Scheme, saying the document was prepared by the state government and later shared with the association for suggestions.
In a firm rebuttal to the department’s clarification, the MCTA cited the Meghalaya High Court’s 20 September judgment in WP(C) No. 281 of 2017. The association pointed to Paragraph 2 of the judgment, which recorded that a trust was created and a draft scheme was prepared by the state government before being handed to the petitioner for response, views and suggestions.
The MCTA set out a timeline to support its position. On 22 March 2023, the government undertook the task of preparing an acceptable pension scheme. On 6 September 2023, the then Advocate General handed over the government-prepared draft rules to the MCTA in open court. The association submitted its suggestions on 5 October that year.
High Court order and PF rights
The MCTA also referred to the High Court’s 15 December 2025 order, which held that the state government was legally bound to notify the pension scheme. The court warned that any deviation from its order could adversely affect association members and other eligible employees working under the deficit system.
The association reiterated its support for the Khasi Jaiñtia Deficit School Teachers’ Association and other deficit employees. It said changing or amending facts already recorded in judicial proceedings would not help address teachers’ concerns. It also maintained that statutory Provident Fund (PF) rights protected under the 1969 Act could not be changed unilaterally without comprehensive and meaningful consultation with eligible stakeholders.
Call for notification
The MCTA urged the state government to acknowledge its role in preparing the 2023 draft and to comply meaningfully with the High Court’s directions. It called for the scheme to be finalized and notified without further delay, saying eligible teachers, employees and associated stakeholders need clarity on their pension entitlements.
The matter now turns on the state government’s official response and the notification of the pension scheme.