2003 Supreme(AP) 1527
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : G.BIKSHAPATHY, S.ANANDA REDDY
Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, department of Pension and Pensioners Welfare, Govt.of India - Appellant
Versus
R.Rama Murthy - Respondent
Decided On : 12-24-03
Headnote:
Constitution Of India - Rule 25 - Section 37 - Issue that arises for consideration - Employees including restoration - Eligible for pension in accordance - Tribunal - In a case a Government employee joins a Corporation or a company or body on immediate absorption basis date on which he actually joins that corporation or company or body In case a Government employee initially joins a corporation or company or body on foreign service terms by retaining a lien Government date from which his unqualified resignation is accepted by government - Provisions of sub-rule shall also apply to Central Government servants who are permitted to be absorbed in joint sector undertakings wholly joint control of Central government and State Government union Territory Administration of joint control of two or more state Governments union Territory administrations - Held, Counsel for employee - Though, arguments appear to be very appealing at first blush but when it is scanned with regard to rule position his contention cannot be accepted - It has to be noted that Public Sector Undertakings absorbers are entitled for benefit of pension on par with Central Government employees - But however one distinction has to be noticed in this regard - Central government employee is entitled to commute not more than of pension and same facility is also allowed to be enjoyed by P. S. U - Absorbers by virtue of judgment of Supreme Court - But receiving terminal benefits in respect of pension calculated with reference to commutation table is not available to central Government employee - He has to receive pension every month after commutation pension - Petition dismissed
( 1 ) THE issue that arises for consideration in the Writ Petition is "what is the mode of calculation of restoration of pension in respect of the employees covered by rule 37-A of C. C. S. Pension Rules, 1972 (for brevity Pension Rules ).
( 2 ) THE practical implementation of the rule is the moot question in this case. The respondent-employee was not an applicant before the tribunal. He filed an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal in o. A. NO. 1345 of 2001 challenging the Order issued by the Accountant General, Orissa, dated:9. 5. 2000 fixing the quantum of pension restored after a period of 15 years under the Pension Rules. It was his case that he was appointed as U. D. C. in the office of Accountant General, Orissa in Puri branch and he was subsequently promoted as Accounts Officer on 7. 4. 1964. He was sent on deputation to Computer maintenance Corporation after his name was selected by the Comptroller and Auditor general of India. In the said Corporation he was appointed as Accounts Manager in hyderabad division and subsequently the applicant was permanently absorbed from 1. 6. 1979. Thus, he served the Central government from 27. 11. 1950 to 31. 5. 1979. His case is that all the Central Government employees, who were deputed to the government Corporations or Government autonomous Bodies and subsequently absorbed permanently, the period of service in the Central Government i. e. prior to absorption was treated as voluntary retirement and such employees became eligible for pension in accordance with the pension Rules on par with the Central government employees including the restoration of pension after 15 years.
( 3 ) THE question that arises as to what is the amount of pension to which he is entitled in respect of the service rendered in the central Government in accordance with rules. It is not in dispute thai the period worked in the Central Government would qualify him to earn full pension and not prorata pension. Under Rule 5 (1) of C. C. S. Computation Rules, 1981 (hereinafter called Computation Rules), the Central government employee is entitled to commute not more than 1/3rd of the pension eligible to be drawn by him. However, separate provisions, are made with regard to regulation of pension in respect of absorbees like the petitioner. In this regard, rule 37 and 37-A of the Pension Rules are relevant which are extracted below:"rule 37: Pension on absorption in or under a corporation, company or body:- (1) A Government servant who has been permitted to be absorbed in a service or post in or under a corporation or Company wholly or substantially owned or controlled by the central Government or a State government or in or under a Body controlled or financed by the Central government or a State Government, shall be deemed to have retired from service from the date of such absorption and subject to sub-rule (3) he shall be eligible to receive retirement benefits which he may be elected, or deemed to have elected, and from such date as may be determined, in accordance with the orders of the central Government applicable to him. EXPLANATION: Date of absorption shall be :- (I) In a case a Government employee joins a Corporation or a company or body on immediate absorption basis the date on which he actually joins that corporation or company or body; (II) In case a Government employee initially joins a corporation or company or body on foreign service terms by retaining a lien under the Government the date from which his unqualified resignation is accepted by the government. (2) The provisions of sub-rule (1) shall also apply to Central Government servants who are permitted to be absorbed in joint sector undertakings, wholly under the joint control of Central government and State Government/ union Territory Administration of under the joint control of two or more state Governments/union Territory administrations. (3) Where there is a pension scheme in a body controlled or financed by