ups_01186 — Whether the benefit of OM, dated 22-9-2009 for revising the pension of the Applicant when he retired voluntarily as Naib Tehsildar (Grade II) with effect from 15-4-2006, is to be decided by the Respondents, namely Chief Secretary, Government of NCT, Delhi

Whether the benefit of OM, dated 22-9-2009 for revising the pension of the Applicant when he retired voluntarily as Naib Tehsildar (Grade II) with effect from 15-4-2006, is to be decided by the Respondents, namely Chief Secretary, Government of NCT, Delhi — This chunk is a part of an Original Application (O.A.) No. 4326 of 2012, where the question at hand is whether the benefit of an Office Memorandum (OM) dated 22-9-2009 for revising the pension of the... — Facts: The Applicant herein, joined as Naib Tehsildar (Grade II) in 1974 in the Government of NCT, Delhi. He was promoted as Grade-I (DASS) in 1990 and voluntarily retired with effect from 15-4-2006 when he was drawing a pay scale of ₹ 8,000-275-13,500. Government of NCT, Services Department (Service-I Branch) issued an OM, dated 22-9-2009 providing for revision of pension of Grade-I (DASS) who were appointed to ex-cadre posts and retired during the period 1-1-1996 to 30-11-2006 notionally. Thus the Applicant started espousing his claim for pension. He approached the officials for the above claim. Initially he filed O.A. No. 1309 of 2012 before the Tribunal for the above relief which was disposed of directing him to approach the authorities to take a decision. Additional Secretary (Vigilance) passed the Order, dated 27-8-2012 which held that a final decision can be taken after the recommendations of the High Power Committee set up by Services Department of GNCT, Delhi for review of non-functional grade. The review recommendation was examined and OM, dated 22-9-2009 was issued. The Committee felt that the grant of pay scale of Delhi Government should be reiterated. This OA is filed for a direction to revise the pension of the Applicant giving benefit of OM, dated 22-9-2009 with 18% interest on difference of arrears. He also questioned the Constitution of the Committee by Order, dated 12-5-2010. The Applicant's main contention is that, as many of his juniors got financial upgradation on completion of four years regular service Grade-I (DASS) on notional basis with effect from 1996 and actually from 1-12-2006, he cannot be denied the benefit. The further details of the case is enumerated above. The Administrative Ministry of Government of NCT, Delhi namely, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India issued orders, dated 9-4-2010 directing to withdraw the non-functional scale of ₹ 8,000-13,500, the grant of such scale to retired employees does not arise. Hence there is no basis for revision of pension of ad hoc DANICS who retired between 1-1-1996 to 30-11-2006. It is a settled principle of law that equal opportunity is guaranteed before law and not de hors the law. The judgment of State of West Bengal and others v. Debasish Mukherjee and others [ JT 2011 (11) SC 1 ], is relied up for the above view. Para. 21 of the above judgment is reproduced. In O.A. No. 2014 of 2012, it is said that the decision of the Committee adverse to an employee, it can be recovered from DCRG. But the Applicant had received all his retiral dues when he retired in the year 2006. In the case of Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Gurnam Kaur [1989 (1) SCC 101 ] orders which are not authoritative, the decision may be treated as per incuriam. Paras. 11 and 12 of the above Apex Court judgment are reproduced for clarity. In view of the above discussion, the Tribunal held.