Back
2001 Supreme(Bom) 276
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
R.M. Lodha D.B. Bhosale, JJ.
Group Captain A.S. Gangoli others.... Petitioners.
Versus
Union of India others.... Respondents.
Writ Petition No. 2973 of 1989, decided on 14-3-2001.
Advocates appeared :
V.K. Rambhadran, for petitioners.
S.G. Page with R.C. Master, for respondents.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that depriving certain retired officers of weightage in pension and gratuity benefits based on premature retirement for joining a public sector undertaking, while granting the same benefit to officers retiring for personal reasons, constitutes discrimination and is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Headnote:
Weightage - Pension Benefits - Pension Regulations for the Air Force, 1961 - Summary of the Acts and Sections: Regulations 3, 16, 22, 25, 26, and 36 of the Pension Regulations for the Air Force, 1961 - The court discussed the Regulations relating to pensionary benefits of personnel of Air Force and the delegation of various procedures affecting the personnel whose pension are regulated by regulation in Part I. The court also highlighted the interpretation of Regulations 3 and 16 by the Apex Court in (Union of India and others v. Lt. Col. P.S. Bhargava)1, A.I.R. 1997 Supreme Court 565, emphasizing that the full rate of pension or gratuity is to be granted unless the service rendered is not satisfactory and that the right to terminal benefits can be taken away only if an order is passed under Regulation 3 or 16.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, retired Air Force officers, sought to impugn a decision depriving them of weightage in pension and gratuity benefits based on premature retirement for joining a public sector undertaking. They claimed that the decision was violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the decision depriving the petitioners of weightage in pension and gratuity benefits based on premature retirement for joining a public sector undertaking was illegal and inoperative. The court directed the respondent to grant the petitioners the weightage of 7 years for pension and 5 years for retirement gratuity, and to recompute and make payment of the due amount with interest if not paid within the specified time.
Issues: The main issue was whether the decision depriving the petitioners of weightage in pension and gratuity benefits based on premature retirement for joining a public sector undertaking was violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the classification made by the respondent for giving benefit of weightage to one class of the officers and personnel who are given premature retirement for personal reasons and to deprive the other class of the officers and personnel who get premature retirement in public interest for joining public undertakings cannot be justified. The court found clear discrimination by the respondent and declared the Note 1 appended to the communication dated 30-10-1987 as illegal and inoperative.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, declared the Note 1 appended to the respondent's letter dated 30-10-1987 as illegal and inoperative, and directed the respondent to grant the petitioners the weightage of 7 years for pension and 5 years for retirement gratuity, and to recompute and make payment of the due amount with interest if not paid within the specified time.
2. The petitioners were employed in Indian Air Force (in short 'IAF') as Group Captains, Wing Commanders etc. and put in about 20/25 years of service. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent devised the scheme to solve the problem of shortage of junior ranks and a surplus in the middle seniority bracket of large number of officers, whereby the Public Sector undertakings could approach the IAF for release of surplus officers. For the purpose of Vayudoot Ltd. (Public Sector Undertaking), it is the case of the petitioners that IAF encouraged them and other officers to apply for premature retirement and join Vayudoot in public interest. Accordingly the petitioners applied for premature retirement in public interest for joining public sector undertaking viz. Vayudoot. By order dated 6-5-1987, the respondent approved the petitioners' premature retirement from IAF in public interest with effect from 18-5-1987. In the said order the respondent informed the petitioners that in respect of prorata pensionary benefits, admissible to them on absorption in Vayudoot, the separate order shall be issued. The petitioners have averred that they were assured that there would be no loss of benefits of pension, gratuity or any other retirement benefits and that they would have the benefit of 100% computation of pension yet the respondent by its decision as contained in the letter dated 30-10-1987 has deprived the petitioners of the weightage of 7 years in the matter of pension and weightage of 5 years in the matter of gratuity. The petitioners made representations to the concerned authorities for redressal of their grievances and as nothing was done by them, the petitioners were constrained to file the present writ petition.
3. Mr. Rambhadran, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that para 1 of the Note appended to the communication dated 30-10-1987 which deprives the petitioners weightage of 7 years for pension and weightage of 5 years in the matter of retirement gratuity is per se violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and discriminatory in as much as the pilots of IAF, who retired prematurely on their own personal request either for better prospects or otherwise are given such weightage of 7 years for the purpose of pension and weightage of 5 years for the purpose of retirement gratuity while petitioners and like who have retired prematurely in public interest for joining public sector are denied such weightage of 7 years for pension and 5 years in retirement gratuity.
4. The respondent has filed the counter to the writ petition and in para 10 of the counter affidavit dated 4th November, 1990 they have set up the defence that the officers who retired prematurely on account of superannuation or any personal reasons are treated as normal retirees for all purposes and, therefore, they have allowed weightage to them. It is stated that Air Force Officers are allowed to retire prematurely on two grounds viz. 1) for personal reasons which are generally suppersession, where such officers do not want to serve under their juniors promoted to higher rank, and 2) for absorption in the Public Sector undertakings/autonomous bodies. It is respondents' case that the officers who get premature retirement for absorption in public sector undertakings are not entitled to any weightage. In additional affidavit dated 7-2
