1. Pension computation dispute — Challenge to cut-off dates in Rajasthan Service Rules regarding emoluments and pension scales for pre-1979 retirees. (Para 1 , 2 )
Back
Next 
1997 Supreme(SC) 270
1997(3) SUPREME 566
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.C. Agrawal and G.B. Pattanaik, JJ.
State of Rajasthan & Anr. -Appellants
versus
Prem Raj -Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 5450 of 1994
With
Civil Appeal No. 798 of 1997
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 13444 of 1994)
Decided on 14-2-1997
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellants : Aruneshwar Gupta, Manoj K. Das and Solanki Rath, Advocates.
For the Respondent : Ashok K. Srivastava, Advocate, (for Sikkim), Sushil Kr. Jain, A.P. Dhamija, B.L. Bishnoi and K.K. Gupta, Advocates.
Important Points
The Court held that while liberalized pension benefits should be extended to pre-retirees, they need not be applied in the same manner or extent as later retirees. If a valid notification already provides benefits to pre-retirees, earlier cut-off dates cannot be struck down without challenging that notification.
Subject
Pension Law - Pension Scheme Liberalization
Act Referred
RJASTHAN SERVICE RULES: R.250(c), R.256, R.250(c)(1)(a)
SERVICE LAW: .
SERVICE LAW: .
Headnote
SERVICE LAW-Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951-Rule 256, 250C (1)(a)-Pension-Computation of-State of Rajasthan liberalised pension scheme-Notification dated 21.1.1980-Calculation of pension on slab basis in respect of Government servants retiring on or after 31.3.1979 - Notification dated 2.9.1985-Benefit of revised formula extended to all pensioners provided they were in receipt of pension as on 1.4.1979-Notification dated 2.9.1985 not having been challenged-High Court not having quashed the same, pre-March 31, 1979 retirees would be governed by the same-Impugned judgment of High Court striking down cut off date of 1.4.1970 in Rule 256-A, 1.4.1973 in Rule 250-C and cut off date in sub-rule 3 of Rule 250-C not sustainable-High Court committed gross error in examining validity of earlier amended provisions and striking down the same without striking down Notification dated 2.9.1985. (Paras 7 & 9)
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether cut-off dates for liberalized pension schemes are arbitrary under Article 14 and whether subsequent liberalizing notifications govern the computation for all retirees. (Para 5 , 6 )
3. The High Court erred by striking down earlier notifications without considering a subsequent, unchallenged notification that extended revised pension benefits to pre-1979 retirees. (Para 7 , 9 )
4. Where a subsequent notification extends liberalized pension benefits to earlier retirees, the computation must be governed by that notification if it remains unchallenged. (Para 9 )
5. Appeals allowed — High Court judgment set aside — Writ petitions dismissed. (Para 9 )
6. Can the State fix a cut-off date for a new pension scheme?
Yes, the State can specify a date for new regulations to come into force, provided the date is prescribed in a reasonable manner based on facts and circumstances, rather than being arbitrary. (Para 8 )
7. Does the principle in D.S. Nakara apply to all pension claims?
No, it has limited application. It does not cover all claims for identical pension amounts regardless of retirement date, especially when reckonable emoluments differ or when different structural schemes (like Provident Fund vs. Pension) are involved. (Para 8 )
8. How should liberalized pension schemes be applied to pre-cut-off retirees?
While retirees prior to a cut-off date may be entitled to the benefit of a liberalized scheme, they may not receive the benefit in the same manner or to the same extent as those retiring after the date. (Para 8 )
JUDGMENT
G.B. Pattanaik, J.-These two appeals involve a common question of law and as such were heard together and are being disposed of by the common judgment. The respondent in both the appeals are pre-1979 retiree, the respondent in Civil Appeal No. 5450 of 1994 having superannuated on 14.11.1969 and the respondent in the other appeal having superannuated before December 1968. On superannuation, their pension had been computed in accordance with Rule 256 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, (hereinafter referred to as the Rules ) whereunder Dearness Allowance received by them while in service had not been taken into account for computation in the amount of pension. On 18th March, 1971 the Governor of Rajasthan in exercise of powers conferred by proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution amended the Rules giving it retrospective effect w.e.f. 1.4.1970, which was inserted as Rule 250-C(1)(a). The said provision stipulates that in case of Government Servants retiring from service on or after 1.4.1970 the term "emoluments" used for the purpose of pension, service gratuity and death-cum-retirement gratuity shall mean the pay as defined in Rule 7(24) and Dearness pay appropriate to pay, if any, which the officer was receiving immediately before his retirement. The aforesaid provision is extracted herein below in extenso:
"Notwithstanding the provisions contained in rule 250, 250-A, 250-B in case of Government Servants retiring from service on or after 1.4.1970, the term emoluments used for purposes of pension, service gratuity and death-cum-retirement gratuity shall mean the "pay" as defined in rule 7(24) and dearness pay appropriate to pay, if any, which the officer was receiving immediately before his retirement, provided that-
(2) The Special Pay, if any, granted for performance of additional duties or a post in addition to duties of his own post shall not be taken into account for the purpose of this rule".
2. By the said Notification dated 18th March, 1971 Rule 250-A(1) was also amended giving it retrospective effect from w.e.f. 1.4.1970, which is extracted herein below in extenso :
"Notwithstanding the provisions contained in rule 256, in case of a Government servant retiring from service on or after 1.4.70 the amount of superannuation, retiring, invalid and compensation gratuity and the pension shall be admissible as follows :
Completed six Scale of Maximum
monthly periods Gratuity/ Pension
of qualifying Pension (in Rs. per
service annum)
1 2 3
60 30/80th ,, ,, 8100
By Notification dated 2.12.1974 giving it retrospective effect w.e.f. 31.10.1974 Rule 256 -B was also amended which extracted herein below in extenso :
"Notwithstanding the provisions contained in Rule 256 -A, in respect of a Government Servant retiring on or after 31.10.1974 the amount of superannuation retiring invalid and compensation gratuity and pension admissible shall be as follows:-
Completed six Scale of Maximum
monthly Gratuity/ Pension
periods of pension (in Rs. per
qualifying annum)
1 2 3
66 33/80th ,, ,, 12000.00
The effect of the aforesaid amendment was that while the maximum pension in respect of Government Servants retiring from service on or after 1.4.1970 was 8,100, but those who retired on or after 31.10.1974 it became 12,000 and while in case of the former pension was to be computed on 30/80th but in case of later it became 33/80th. By Notification dated 2.12.74 Rule 250-C(3) was also amended providing therein that in case of Government servants retiring on or after 31.10.1974 the term "emoluments" used for the purpose of pension, service gratuity and death-cum-retirement gratuity shall mean pay as defined in Rule 7(24) and shall include dearness allowance, dearness pay (where admissible) and ad-hoc reliefs admissible on 31.12.1972. By Notifica
