2010 Supreme(SC) 125

2010 (1) Supreme 589
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.V. Raveendran and K.S. Radhakrishnan, JJ.
Union of India — Appellant
versus
R.K. Chopra — Respondent
Civil Appeal No.1096 of 2010
[Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.9071 of 2009]
Decided on : 01-02-2010

Headnote:Service Law-Central Civil Services (Revision Pay ) Rules,1997- Subsistence allowance- Claim of a Government servant for revision of subsistence allowance based on the pay revision effected by Rules,1997-Entitlement to-Registration of case against Respondent working as a Desk Officer in Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion under the Ministry of Commerce and Industries and he was placed under suspension by Department- While undergoing suspension he made a representation for revision of subsistence allowance based on the 5th Pay Commission Report which was rejected - Tribunal, held that since respondent did not challenge earlier communication, rejecting his claim, he would not be entitled to any arrears on account of revised subsistence allowance till the said date- It was held that he would be entitled to arrears of revision of subsistence allowance when he was dismissed from service- Writ Petition-Dismissed by High Court holding that it did not find any infirmity in the order of Tribunal –Appeal- On a combined reading of Note 3 to Rule 7 of the Revised Pay Rules and FR 53(1)(ii)(a) with the clarification with Office Memorandum dated 27th August, 1958 held clear that if the revision of pay takes effect from a date prior to the date of suspension of a Government servant then he would be entitled to benefit of increment in pay and in the subsistence allowance for the period of suspension, but if the revision scale of pay takes effect from a date falling within the period of suspension then the benefit of revision of pay and subsistence allowances will accrue to him, only after reinstatement depending on the fact whether the period of suspension is treated as duty or not- In view of the clear distinction drawn by the Rule making authority between the cases in which the Revised scale of pay takes effect from a date prior to the date of suspension and a date falling within the period of suspension, the plea of discrimination raised cannot be sustained especially when there is no challenge to Rules- The benefit of pay revision and the consequent revision of subsistence allowance stand postponed till the conclusion of departmental proceedings, if the pay revision has come into effect while the Government servant is under suspension- So far as the present case is concerned, the Revised Pay Rules came into force on 1st January, 1996 when the respondent was under suspension and later he was dismissed from service on 04.08.2005 and hence the benefit of pay revision or the revision of subsistence allowance did not accrue to him- Tribunal as well as the High Court committed an error in holding that the respondent was entitled to benefit of Revised Pay Rules- Appeal Allowed (Para 26)

       Facts of the Case :

        A case was registered against Respondent working as a Desk Officer in Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion under the Ministry of Commerce and Industries and he was placed under suspension by Department. While undergoing suspension he made a representation for revision of subsistence allowance based on the 5th Pay Commission Report which was rejected . Tribunal, held that since respondent did not challenge earlier communication, rejecting his claim, he would not be entitled to any arrears on account of revised subsistence allowance till the said date. It was held that he would be entitled to arrears of revision of subsistence allowance when he was dismissed from service. Writ Petition thereagainst was Dismissed by High Court holding that it did not find any infirmity in the order of Tribunal.

        2. Present appeal has been filed against said order of High Court.

       Findings of the Court :

        On a combined reading of Note 3 to Rule 7 of the Revised Pay Rules and FR 53(1)(ii)(a) with the clarification with Office Memorandum dated 27th August, 1958 held clear that if the revision of pay takes effect from a date prior to the date of suspension of a Government servant then he would be entitled to benefit of increment in pay and in the subsistence allowance for the period of suspension, but if the revision scale of pay takes effect from a date falling within the period of suspension then the benefit of revision of pay and subsistence allowances will accrue to him, only after reinstatement depending on the fact whether the period of suspension is treated as duty or not. In view of the clear distinction drawn by the Rule making authority between the cases in which the Revised scale of pay takes effect from a date prior to the date of suspension and a date falling within the period of suspension, the plea of discrimination raised cannot be sustained especially when there is no challenge to Rules. The benefit of pay revision and the consequent revision of subsistence allowance stand postponed till the conclusion of departmental proceedings, if the pay revision has come into effect while the Government servant is under suspension. So far as the present case is concerned, the Revised Pay Rules came into force on 1st January, 1996 when the respondent was under suspension and later he was dismissed from service on 04.08.2005 and hence the benefit of pay revision or the revision of subsistence allowance did not accrue to him. Tribunal as well as the High Court committed an error in holding that the respondent was entitled to benefit of Revised Pay Rules.

       Result : Appeal Allowed