SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Del) 1372

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Vipin Sanghi, A.K. Chawla, JJ.

Delhi Transport Corporation – Appellant
Versus
Ram Kishan Sharma – Respondent
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3459 of 2017; Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 15139 of 2017, 41642 of 2018
Decided On : 11-02-2019

Advocates Appeared:
Abhishek Goyal, Adv., Poonam Gupta, Adv., Aditi Gupta, Adv.

The right to receive pension is a continuing right, and interest is awarded primarily to offset the effect of inflation and falling value of money.

Headnote:

Pension Scheme - Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 - Rule 49

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner challenged the order denying pension under the Delhi Transport Corporation Pensions Scheme, 1992. The respondent took voluntary retirement in 1993 and later approached the tribunal in 2009, leading to the current petition.

Finding of the Court:

The court rejected the petitioner's argument that the circular of 03.06.2004 could not be given retrospective effect, stating that the right to receive pension is a continuing right. The court limited the relief of grant of interest to the respondent to three years prior to the filing of the first Original Application in 2009.

Issues: The issues included the applicability of the circular dated 03.06.2004, the bar of limitation, and the grant of interest and costs to the respondent.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the right to receive pension is a continuing right and that interest is awarded primarily to offset the effect of inflation and falling value of money. The court limited the grant of interest to three years prior to the filing of the first Original Application in 2009.

Final Decision: The petition was disposed of with the direction for the petitioner to make payment of the interest and the costs within four weeks from the date of the judgment.

JUDGMENT :

Vipin Sanghi, J.

The limited issue on which notice was issued by us in this petition was with regard to the relief of costs and interests from the date of retirement of the respondent i.e. 31.01.1993, on the retiral dues, till payment is awarded to the respondent.

2. In our order dated 25.04.2017, we have noticed the relevant facts and we consider it appropriate to reproduce the relevant extract from the said order, which reads as follows:

"1. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 20.09.2016 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (Principal Bench) in O.A.4064/2014. The tribunal vide the impugned order allowed the claim of the petitioner for grant of pension under the Delhi Transport Corporation Pensions Scheme, 1992. The tribunal has directed payment of arrears of pension to the respondent along with interest from the date it become due till the date of payment. The tribunal has also awarded cost of Rs. 25,000/- to the respondent/applicant. The pension was initially denied to the respondent on the ground that he took voluntary retirement on 31.01.1993 - when he completed 9 years, 10 months and 9 days service. To be eligible for drawing pension, he should have rendered minimum 10 years of service.

2. Pertinently, when the petitioner sought to release the Contributory Provident Fund to the respondent, the said amount was not accepted by the respondent/applicant.

3. The respondent learnt of the circular dated 03.06.2004 issued by the petitioner, which clarified the position with respect to applicability of Rule 49 (3) of Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972. The circular clarified that qualifying service of nine years, nine months and above will be rounded of to 10 years for the purpose of grant of pension under Section 49 (2) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972.

4. Upon learning of the said clarification, the respondent initially approached the tribunal by filing O.A.2406/2009. Eventually, he filed the aforesaid O.A.No.4064/2014, which has been allowed by the Tribunal.

5. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the circular of 03.06.2004 could not be given retrospective effect from the year 1993, when the respondent took voluntary retirement. We do not find merit in this submission of the petitioner. A perusal of the circular dated 03.06.2004 shows that it merely seeks to clarify the position with regard to the application of manner of calculation of the qualifying service for determining the eligibility of the Government Servant to proportionate pension. To appreciate the position, we may set out the relevant extract from Rule 49 and the Circular dated 03.06.2004. Rule 49, in so far as it is relevant reads as follows:

"49 Amount of Pension

(1) In the case of Government servant retiring in accordance with the provisions of these rules before completing qualifying service of ten year, the amount of service gratuity shall be calculated at the rate of half month's emoluments for every completed six monthly period of qualifying service.

(1-A) xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

(2) In the case of a Government servant retiring in accordance with the provisions of these rules after completing the qualifying service of not less than ten years, the amount of pension shall be calculated at fifty per cent of emoluments or average emoluments, whichever is more beneficial to him, subject to a minimum of three thousand and five hundred rupees per mensem and a maximum of forty-five thousand rupees per mensem.

(2A) xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

(3) In calculating the length of qualifying service, fraction of a year equal to three months and above shall be treated as a completed one half-year and reckoned as qualifying service.

(4) xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

6. The circular of 03.06.2004 reads as follows:

"No.28/16/2004-P & PW (B)

Government of India

Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions

Department of Pension and Pensioners Welfare

3rd Floor, Lok Nayak Bhavan,

New Delhi 110 003,

Th







































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top