it2025_00347 — Revision of Subsistence Allowance based on pay revision coming into effect during suspension period is impermissible If revision of pay takes effect from a date prior to date of suspension, suspendee is entitled to increment in pay and Subsistence Allowance for period of suspension If pay revision takes effect from a date falling within the period of suspension, then benefit thereof would accrue to him only after reinstatement depending on whether the period of suspension is treated as duty or n

Revision of Subsistence Allowance based on pay revision coming into effect during suspension period is impermissible If revision of pay takes effect from a date prior to date of suspension, suspendee is entitled to increment in pay and Subsistence Allowance for period of suspension If pay revision takes effect from a date falling within the period of suspension, then benefit thereof would accrue to him only after reinstatement depending on whether the period of suspension is treated as duty or not — The chunk provided is about a government employee who made a representation in 2002 to enhance his Subsistence Allowance based on the Fifth Pay Commission scales that came into effect from 1-1-1996. ... — Facts : The Respondent, herein working in the pay scale of ₹ 2,000- 3,500 was a Desk Officer in the Department of Industrial Policy and promotion in the Ministry of Commerce and Industries. He was placed under suspension under Rule 10 (2) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. He was granted Subsistence Allowance under Fundamental Rule 53 (1)

(ii)

(a) and enhanced to 50% by Order, dated 30-5-1991. He was drawing a basic pay of ₹ 2,825 in Fourth Pay Commission at the time of suspension. He made a representation for enhancing his Subsistence Allowance by Representation, dated 22-7-2002 based on the scales of pay of Fifth Pay Commission which came into force from 1-1-1996. That representation was rejected by Memo., dated 29-10-2002 stating that a person under suspension is not entitled to draw either increment during the period of suspension or get his pay fixed in the revised scale of Fifth Pay Commission. He was dismissed from service on 4-8-2005 as he was convicted by a Criminal Court by Judgment, dated 30-3-2002. The Applicant challenged the orders of the Appellant, dated 29-10-2002 for enhancing his subsistence allowance placing reliance on the case of J.S. Kharat v. Union of India [ 2002-2003 (CAT) Full Bench Judgments 169 ]. The Appellants relying on the

Note 3 of Rule 7 of Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1997 (Revised Pay Rules for short) held that he is not entitled for revision of subsistence allowance with effect from 1-1-1996. Further, it was held that Kharat's case (supra) was not concerned with the applicability of the rule quoted above. The Tribunal dismissed his case against which he filed an appeal before the High Court. The High Court held that as those employees suspended after the revision of pay scales are entitled for enhanced subsistence allowance based on revision of pay scale, it is incongruous to deny such enhancement for those suspended earlier to the date of revision of pay scale. Hence it was ordered by the High Court to revise the subsistence allowance from 1-1-2002 till 4-8-2005. Aggrieved by the order of the High Court, this appeal is filed in Supreme Court by the Appellant herein. The Apex Court after analyzing the various judgments in precedent cases quoted by both the parties held that none of the cases are applicable in the present one. Hence he analyzed the Rule position. Rule 53 (1) of FR 53 deals with the payment of Subsistence Allowance. Based on the above rules, it was held: