ups_01185 — The Applicant herein, even though he worked in HAG scale of pay in Fifth Central Pay Commission scales of pay on a vacancy temporarily, he was drawing pay in SAG scales, his pension will be calculated taking into account minimum of the Pay Band with addition of Grade Pay applicable to SAG scales, his pension will be fixed treating him as SAG Officer and taking into account the pay he was drawing in SAG

UPS

The Applicant herein, even though he worked in HAG scale of pay in Fifth Central Pay Commission scales of pay on a vacancy temporarily, he was drawing pay in SAG scales, his pension will be calculated taking into account minimum of the Pay Band with addition of Grade Pay applicable to SAG scales, his pension will be fixed treating him as SAG Officer and taking into account the pay he was drawing in SAG — This chunk is a part of the judgment in the case N.V.V. Char v. Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources and another where the court discusses the correct pension fixation for an employee who retired b... — Facts: The Applicant, after completion of 33 years of service attained superannuation from the post of Commissioner (ER) under the Ministry of Water Resources with effect from 30-6-1997. At the time of retirement, he was drawing pay in the pay scale of ₹ 18,400-22,400. He was entrusted with the additional charge of the post of Vice-Chairman, Brahmaputra Board by Office Order, dated 18-12-1996 with effect from 1-3-1996 to 31-12-1996 or till the regular incumbent joined, whichever was earlier. However, he continued as Vice-Chairman, Brahmaputra Board till 20-3-1997 in the grade of ₹ 22,400-26,000. He joined back as Commissioner and retired on 30-6-1997 on superannuation. At the time of retirement in Fifth Central Pay Commission scales of pay, his pension and other retiral benefits were calculated on the basis of 10 months' average emoluments as per rule in vogue at that time and his pension was fixed as ₹ 10,772. His pension was fixed based on his pay and other emoluments as Vice- Chairman, Brahmaputra Board in the pay scale of ₹ 22,400-26,000 for 6 months, 20 days and 3 months and 10 days as Commissioner in the scale of pay of ₹ 18,400-22,400 and his pension was fixed as ₹ 10,772. In the Sixth Central Pay Commission, the Applicant submits that as per Clause 4.2 of the OM, dated 1-9-2008, in no case the pension could be less than the minimum of pay drawn at the time of retirement. Hence he sent a representation for fixing his pension based on the pay scale of ₹ 67,000-79,000 corresponding to ₹ 22,400-26,000 for 6 months and 20 days when he worked as Vice-Chairman of the Brahmaputra Board and the remaining 3 months and 10 days in the Pay Band of ₹ 37,400-67,600 (corresponding to ₹ 18,400-22,400 of Fifth CPC) with two increments for 10 months average. However, his pension was fixed as per SAG pay scale as ₹ 27,350 with effect from 24-9-2007 without taking into account, his higher pay scale of ₹ 22,400-26,000 (₹ 67,000-79,000) for 6 months and 20 days. Hence he filed this OA for revising his pension and re-fixing his pension inter alia on the basis of Memorandum, dated 2-9-2008 on the basis of Sixth Central Pay Commission. The pension / family pension of existing pre-2006 pensioners / family pensioners will be consolidated with effect from 1-1-2006 adding various items of pension, etc. It is to be noted that in no case, the pension will be lower than 50% of minimum of the Pay Band plus Grade Pay corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner retired. The submission by the Respondents is that OM, dated 1-9-2008 does not provide for re-fixing the pension by taking into account, the average pay / emoluments and as such there is no infirmity or illegality in the revision / re-fixation of the pension of the Applicant. The Tribunal heard both sides. The short grievance of the Applicant is that, he drew higher scale of ₹ 22,400-26,000 for a period of 6 months and 20 days while working as Vice-Chairman which is replaced in the Sixth Central Pay Commission by ₹ 75,500-80,000, 50% of that minimum becomes ₹ 37,750 which is to be fixed as his pension in Sixth CPC scales as per Para. 4.2 of the OM, dated 1-9-2008. In view of the above, the only question which falls for consideration is, as to whether the minimum pension of the Applicant will be fixed on the higher scale of ₹ 22,400-26,000 while working as Chairman or the scale of ₹ 18,400-22,400 which he was drawing at the time of retirement i.e. 30-6-1997. "No doubt, the OM, dated 1-9-2008 read with OM, dated 28-1-2013 stipulates that for pre-1-1-2006 retirees, the pension will be re-worked as per formula in Para. 4.1 of OM, dated 1-9-2008 with the further stipulation in the OM, dated 28-1-2013 that in case of pension worked out thus is less than 50% of the minimum of Sixth Central Pay Commission scale corresponding to the pre-revised scale, then the incumbent will draw at least 50% of the minimum revised scale. In that event, the official drawing scale of pay of ₹ 37,400-67,000 with Grade Pay of ₹ 10,000, the pension in Sixth Central Pay Commission comes to ₹ 27,350 which is the pension fixed by Respondents for the Applicant in Sixth Central Pay Commission scale. Once the pension is fixed for pre-1-1-2006 retiree based on 10 months' average scale, that chapter is closed. As per OM in Para. 4.1, dated 1-9-2008, 50% of the minimum pay would be corresponding pay scale in Sixth Central Pay Commission which is correctly applied in the case of the Applicant. There is no case for re-opening the pension fixation beyond the scope of Circulars, dated 1-9-2008 and 28-1-2013. OM, dated 2-9-2008 is applicable to those employees retired after 1-1-2006 whereas the Applicant retired on 30-6-1997. The date of effect under Para. 3.1 clearly states that it will apply to retirees retired on or after 1-1-2006. Separate orders had been issued for retirees before 1-1-2006. The case of the Applicant is covered by OM, dated 1-9-2008. Hence his pension is correctly fixed as ₹ 27,350 in the scale of ₹ 18,400-22,400 minimum of which is ₹ 54,700 and 50% of the same comes to ₹ 27,350. In the circumstances, I am of the view that when any instrument or circular clearly provides that it is to be applied only in respect of a group of persons or class of people, the other group of persons or class of people who are not identically placed, cannot by stretching or adding words in the instrument or the circular, claim the benefit out of it. Thus, the Applicant's pension has rightly been fixed by Respondents and no interference is called for in this proceeding".

UPS

The Applicant herein, even though he worked in HAG scale of pay in Fifth Central Pay Commission scales of pay on a vacancy temporarily, he was drawing pay in SAG scales, his pension will be calculated taking into account minimum of the Pay Band with addition of Grade Pay applicable to SAG scales, his pension will be fixed treating him as SAG Officer and taking into account the pay he was drawing in SAG — This chunk is a part of the judgment in the case N.V.V. Char v. Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources and another where the court discusses the correct pension fixation for an employee who retired b... — Facts: The Applicant, after completion of 33 years of service attained superannuation from the post of Commissioner (ER) under the Ministry of Water Resources with effect from 30-6-1997. At the time of retirement, he was drawing pay in the pay scale of ₹ 18,400-22,400. He was entrusted with the additional charge of the post of Vice-Chairman, Brahmaputra Board by Office Order, dated 18-12-1996 with effect from 1-3-1996 to 31-12-1996 or till the regular incumbent joined, whichever was earlier. However, he continued as Vice-Chairman, Brahmaputra Board till 20-3-1997 in the grade of ₹ 22,400-26,000. He joined back as Commissioner and retired on 30-6-1997 on superannuation. At the time of retirement in Fifth Central Pay Commission scales of pay, his pension and other retiral benefits were calculated on the basis of 10 months' average emoluments as per rule in vogue at that time and his pension was fixed as ₹ 10,772. His pension was fixed based on his pay and other emoluments as Vice- Chairman, Brahmaputra Board in the pay scale of ₹ 22,400-26,000 for 6 months, 20 days and 3 months and 10 days as Commissioner in the scale of pay of ₹ 18,400-22,400 and his pension was fixed as ₹ 10,772. In the Sixth Central Pay Commission, the Applicant submits that as per Clause 4.2 of the OM, dated 1-9-2008, in no case the pension could be less than the minimum of pay drawn at the time of retirement. Hence he sent a representation for fixing his pension based on the pay scale of ₹ 67,000-79,000 corresponding to ₹ 22,400-26,000 for 6 months and 20 days when he worked as Vice-Chairman of the Brahmaputra Board and the remaining 3 months and 10 days in the Pay Band of ₹ 37,400-67,600 (corresponding to ₹ 18,400-22,400 of Fifth CPC) with two increments for 10 months average. However, his pension was fixed as per SAG pay scale as ₹ 27,350 with effect from 24-9-2007 without taking into account, his higher pay scale of ₹ 22,400-26,000 (₹ 67,000-79,000) for 6 months and 20 days. Hence he filed this OA for revising his pension and re-fixing his pension inter alia on the basis of Memorandum, dated 2-9-2008 on the basis of Sixth Central Pay Commission. The pension / family pension of existing pre-2006 pensioners / family pensioners will be consolidated with effect from 1-1-2006 adding various items of pension, etc. It is to be noted that in no case, the pension will be lower than 50% of minimum of the Pay Band plus Grade Pay corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner retired. The submission by the Respondents is that OM, dated 1-9-2008 does not provide for re-fixing the pension by taking into account, the average pay / emoluments and as such there is no infirmity or illegality in the revision / re-fixation of the pension of the Applicant. The Tribunal heard both sides. The short grievance of the Applicant is that, he drew higher scale of ₹ 22,400-26,000 for a period of 6 months and 20 days while working as Vice-Chairman which is replaced in the Sixth Central Pay Commission by ₹ 75,500-80,000, 50% of that minimum becomes ₹ 37,750 which is to be fixed as his pension in Sixth CPC scales as per Para. 4.2 of the OM, dated 1-9-2008. In view of the above, the only question which falls for consideration is, as to whether the minimum pension of the Applicant will be fixed on the higher scale of ₹ 22,400-26,000 while working as Chairman or the scale of ₹ 18,400-22,400 which he was drawing at the time of retirement i.e. 30-6-1997. "No doubt, the OM, dated 1-9-2008 read with OM, dated 28-1-2013 stipulates that for pre-1-1-2006 retirees, the pension will be re-worked as per formula in Para. 4.1 of OM, dated 1-9-2008 with the further stipulation in the OM, dated 28-1-2013 that in case of pension worked out thus is less than 50% of the minimum of Sixth Central Pay Commission scale corresponding to the pre-revised scale, then the incumbent will draw at least 50% of the minimum revised scale. In that event, the official drawing scale of pay of ₹ 37,400-67,000 with Grade Pay of ₹ 10,000, the pension in Sixth Central Pay Commission comes to ₹ 27,350 which is the pension fixed by Respondents for the Applicant in Sixth Central Pay Commission scale. Once the pension is fixed for pre-1-1-2006 retiree based on 10 months' average scale, that chapter is closed. As per OM in Para. 4.1, dated 1-9-2008, 50% of the minimum pay would be corresponding pay scale in Sixth Central Pay Commission which is correctly applied in the case of the Applicant. There is no case for re-opening the pension fixation beyond the scope of Circulars, dated 1-9-2008 and 28-1-2013. OM, dated 2-9-2008 is applicable to those employees retired after 1-1-2006 whereas the Applicant retired on 30-6-1997. The date of effect under Para. 3.1 clearly states that it will apply to retirees retired on or after 1-1-2006. Separate orders had been issued for retirees before 1-1-2006. The case of the Applicant is covered by OM, dated 1-9-2008. Hence his pension is correctly fixed as ₹ 27,350 in the scale of ₹ 18,400-22,400 minimum of which is ₹ 54,700 and 50% of the same comes to ₹ 27,350. In the circumstances, I am of the view that when any instrument or circular clearly provides that it is to be applied only in respect of a group of persons or class of people, the other group of persons or class of people who are not identically placed, cannot by stretching or adding words in the instrument or the circular, claim the benefit out of it. Thus, the Applicant's pension has rightly been fixed by Respondents and no interference is called for in this proceeding".

Original Rule Text

Original Rule Text