Employees who were in service on the effective date of revised pay rules are entitled to the benefits regardless of their technical retirement status, as per the interpretation of applicable rules.

ORDER :

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

Leave granted.

2. The short controversy in the above appeals is as to whether the appellants, who retired on 31.03.2016 are entitled to the revision as brought in by the ‘ Assam State Electricity Board and its Successor Companies Revised Pay Rules , 2017’¹[for short, ‘the Rules of 2017’]. Both the appellants were superannuated in March 2016, they having reached the age of superannuation, 60 years, before the last day in March 2016. By virtue of Fundamental Rule 56(a), their date of retirement from service is extended to the afternoon of the last day of the month in which the employee attains the age of 60 years; thus, both the appellants retired on 31.12.2016.

3. The learned Single Judge before whom the Writ Petition was filed, looking at the Rules of 2017 and FR 56(a) held that the Rules of 2017 applies to an employee who was in service on 31.03.2016, thus entitling both the appellants to the pay revision benefits. The Division Bench in Writ appeal reversed the finding, against which the appellants have approached this Court.

4. We heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel for the appellants, Mr. B.K. Sharma, learned Senior Counsel and Mr. Kaushik Choudhury learned counsel for the Respondents.

5. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants would contend that the Fundamental Rule specifically provided for retirement to be extended to the last day of the month in which an employee attains 60 years; in the present case to 31.03.2016 in which event, the appellants were in service as on 31.03.2016. The Rules of 2017 specifically provided that the revision applies to those in service as on 31.03.2016.

6. It is vehemently argued by the learned Senior Counsel for the respondents that the pay revision rules specifically enabled only those who were appointed and continued on or after 01.04.2016 to the revised pay structure. It is also pointed out that the revised pension shall not be applicable to the persons who had retired on or before 31.03.2016; as is clear from the rule permitting fitment benefits to pensioners.

7. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents specifically referred to the decision of this Court in K. J. George and Ors. v. Chief General Manager, Telecom, BSNL & Anr., (2008) 14 SCC 699, and a decision of the Delhi High Court in Union of India and Ors. v. G.C. Yadav , 2018 SCC OnLine Del 12191, the Special Leave Petition filed against which has been dismissed by an order dated 24.05.2024 in SLP (C) No.33558 of 2018.

8. We will first consider the decision placed before us in K.J. George, (supra) The Fifth Central Pay Commission by Clause 3.1 provided that revised pension will apply to Government servants who retired/died in harness on or after 01.01.1996. The respondents therein who attained the age of superannuation on 16.12.1995 and 03.12.1995 respectively, by virtue of the provision of FR 56 were made to retire only with effect from the afternoon of 31.12.1996. They claimed that they are entitled to the revised pay which came into effect from 01.01.1996 which claim stood declined by this Court.

9. The High Court of Delhi in G.C. Yadav, (supra) was concerned with the Seventh Central Pay Commission implemented on 04.08.2016 in respect of pensioners, retiring on or after 01.01.2016; the date of effect. The respondents-employees therein attained the age of retirement on 31.12.2015. Hence, there is no applicability of FR 56 which provided extension of retirement to the last day of the month only in cases where the date of retirement is on a day prior to 31st day of the