IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Nemai Chand Ghose - Appellant
Versus
Union Of India Ministry Of Defence Thr. Its Secretary & Anr. - Respondents
Civil Writ Petition No. 4976 of 2021
Decided On : 13-09-2021
Pro-Rata Pension - Indian Air Force - The court directed the Indian Air Force to grant pro-rata pension to the petitioner based on the similarity with previous cases and ordered payment of arrears of pro-rata pension from the date of discharge.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought direction for payment of pro-rata pension from the date of termination of service in the Indian Air Force, which was initially rejected by the respondent no.2 citing lack of provision for pro-rata pension in the Pension Regulations for the Air Force, 1961.
Finding of the Court:
The court disposed of the petition directing the Indian Air Force to grant pro-rata pension to the petitioner if found similarly placed as in previous cases, and ordered payment of arrears of pro-rata pension from the date of discharge. The court also allowed further remedies if the petitioner is found not entitled to pro-rata pension for reasons other than those stated in previous judgments.
Issues: The main issue was the entitlement of the petitioner to pro-rata pension from the Indian Air Force, based on the similarity with previous cases and the interpretation of the Pension Regulations for the Air Force, 1961.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the similarity of the petitioner's case with previous cases and the interpretation of the Pension Regulations for the Air Force, 1961, allowing for the grant of pro-rata pension and payment of arrears if found similarly placed.
Final Decision: The court directed the Indian Air Force to grant pro-rata pension to the petitioner if found similarly placed as in previous cases and ordered payment of arrears of pro-rata pension from the date of discharge. Further remedies were allowed if the petitioner is found not entitled to pro-rata pension for reasons other than those stated in previous judgments.
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. - This petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for a direction to the respondent no.2 for payment of the pro-rata pension from the date of the termination of the petitioners service in the Indian Air Force.
2. The representation of the petitioner seeking grant of pro-rata pension has been rejected by the respondent no.2 vide communication dated 26th February, 2021, observing as under:
"2. The contents of your ibid representation have been examined. In this context, it is informed that there is no provision for grant of Pro-Rata Pension to an airman in the Pension Regulations for the Air Force, 1961.
3. As per Regulation 121, Pension Regulations for Air Force 1961, minimum Regular qualifying service to earn Service Pension is 15 years and you had rendered 11 years AND 133 days of qualifying service. By virtue of your length of service, you were eligible for Service Gratuity and Death-Cum-Retirement-Gratuity (DCRG) in terms of Pension Regulation 127, which had already been paid to you at the time of discharge.
4. With regard to Grant of Pro-Rata Pension on the analogy of Court Orders passed by the Honble High Court of Delhi it is clarified that the Court Verdict given by the Honble Court is only in favour of the individual concerned. Hence, your interpretation and demand for grant of Pro-Rata Pension on the basis of various Court Orders incorrect and unsubstantiated as Court Verdicts are specific in nature and relief so granted cannot be considered as precedence for other cases.
5. In view of the above, grant of any kind of pension to those airmen, who do not fulfil the eligibility conditions, will virtually defeat the sanctity of statutory provisions issued by Govt. of India on the subject."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner in this petition claims to be similarly placed to the petitioners in Brijlal Kumar and others v. Union of India and others 2020 SCC OnLine Del 1477 and the petitioner in Govind Kumar Srivastava v. Union of India 2019 SCC OnLine Del 6425 (DB) [against which Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 8813/2019 has been dismissed on 26th April, 2019] and seeks the same relief as claimed therein i.e. of pro rata pension.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on enquiry, states that the requisite No Objection Certificates (NOCs) had been given.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly states that subject to right to verification and right of appeal to the Supreme Court against the judgment in Brijlal Kumar (supra) being saved, the petition be disposed of.
6. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of directing the respondents Indian Air Force that within twelve weeks herefrom, if they find the petitioner to be similarly placed as the petitioner in Govind Kumar Srivastava (supra) and Brijlal Kumar (supra) and other connected petitions, to grant him the same relief as granted in those petitions i.e. by payment of arrears of pro rata pension from the date of discharge till the date of payment and in future to continue to pay pro rata pension to the petitioner. However, if on verification it is found that the petitioner, for any reason, is not entitled to pro rata pension for reasons other than those stated in the judgments in Govind Kumar Srivastava (supra) and Brijlal Kumar (supra) and other connected petitions being in personam, the respondents, within the said twelve weeks, shall communicate to the petitioner, not so found entitled, the reasons in writing thereof and in which event, the petitioner shall be entitled to take further remedies there against. Needless to state that if any document is asked for by the respondents, the same shall be furnished by the petitioner within a week.
7. If the arrears of pro rata pension are not paid within twelve weeks, the same shall also incur interest thereon @ 7% per annum from the expiry of twelve weeks till the date of payment.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement to pro-rata pension from the Indian Air Force based on the similarity with previous cases and the interpretation of the Pension Reg....
Eligibility for pro-rata pension is governed by stringent regulations, and prior court decisions do not automatically create general entitlement for similar cases.
The court upheld the entitlement of the petitioner to pro rata pension if found similarly placed to certain earlier petitioners, establishing the principle of equal treatment under law regarding pens....
Eligibility for pro rata pension must align with precedents if similarly placed; due process requires verification and may include appeal rights.
The court mandates that the petitioner must receive pro rata pension if found similarly situated to previous petitioners, along with conditions for communication of reasons if denied.
The court mandated verification of entitlement for pro rata pension based on established precedents, ensuring timely payment with interest if delayed.
The entitlement to pro rata pension depends on verification of eligibility, ensuring adherence to past judgments while preserving the right to appeal.
Entitlement to pro rata pension is affirmed if eligibility is established, with a directive for timely payment and interest for delays.
The court ruled that similar cases should receive equivalent relief in pension matters, ensuring equitable treatment in the absence of disqualifying factors.
The court's decision was influenced by the principle of granting pro rata pension to similarly placed petitioners and providing the right to appeal if not entitled.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.