The statutory force of rules, impermissibility of creating two classes of pensioners, and the discriminatory nature of the classification were the central legal points established in the judgment.

JUDGMENT

Nelson Sailo, J. - Heard Mrs. Dinari T. Azyu, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. C. Zoramchhana, learned Addl. Advocate General, Mizoram for the respondents.

2. As many as 1348 petitioners have joined hands in filing the instant writ petition on the ground that they all have a common cause of action against the respondent authorities. The petitioners have retired from service between 01.01.2016 to 30.08.2018 and they are arrayed in the writ petition either in their personal capacity or through their legal representative in respect of those who have expired.

3. The case of the petitioners is that the Government of Mizoram in the Finance Department (Pay Research Unit) vide Notification dated 16.08.2018 (Annexure-2) notified the 7th Central Revision of Pay (as modified and extended to employees under the Govt. of Mizoram Rules, 2018. (hereafter referred to as the 7th Revision of Pay Rules for short).

4. The 7th Revision of Pay Rules was made in exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India read with Article 162 of the same Constitution. Clause-1(2) provides that the Rules will come into force on the first day of January, 2016 and the Pay under the rules shall be notionally fixed w.e.f 01.01.2016 and actual monetary benefits shall be paid w.e.f 01.09.2018.

5. Thereafter, the Govt. of Mizoram in the Finance Department (APF Branch) issued O.M dated 13.12.2018 (Annexure-3), in respect of Revised Pension Scheme - 2018 for post 01.01.2016 and for pre 01.01.2016 retirees. The said O.M according to the petitioner has a statutory force, inasmuch as it was issued in the name of the Governor of Mizoram. For the purpose of the present writ petition, we are concerned with post 01.01.2016 retirees. The petitioners' contend that as per clause 3.2 of the said Office Memorandum where pension/family pension/gratuity/commutation of pension etc. has already been sanctioned in cases occurring on or after 01.01.2016, the same shall be revised in terms of the orders in the Office Memorandum. In cases, where pension has been finally sanctioned on the pre-revised orders and if it happens to be more beneficial than the pension becoming due under the orders in the memorandum, the pension already sanctioned shall not be revised to the disadvantage of the pensioner in view of Rule 70 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 (Pension Rules). The petitioners therefore contend that in view of this enabling clause, the gratuity, commutation of pension and leave salary should be revised as entitled to them in view of the fact that they have retired on or after 01.01.2016, making them eligible to get such benefit as per the Revised Pension Scheme - 2018

6. While the petitioners were expecting revision of their entitlements in respect of gratuity, commutation and leave encashment, the respondent authorities in the Finance Department (APF Branch) came up with the impugned O.M dated 15.01.2019 (Annexure-4) whereby, the revision of gratuity and commutation has been made admissible only for those who retired/died between 01.09.2018 and 13.12.2018. Whereas, in respect of those Government servants who retired/died between 01.01.2016 and 31.03.2018, it was made inapplicable. Being aggrieved, the petitioners submitted their representation before the Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram, Finance Department on 20.06.2019 (Annexure-5).

7. In the said representation, the petitioners sought for recalling the O.M dated 15.01.2019 and to extend them the pensionary benefits in terms of the 7th Revision of Pay Rules by revising their respective entitlements in respect of leave encashment, salary, DCRG/Gratuity, commutation, etc. The State respondents thereafter vide Communication dated 10.07.2019 (Annexure-6) informed the petitioners that the lump sum benefits such as leave encashment, Death cum Retirement Gratuity and commutation being one-time payment, the same cannot be notionally revised in the same manner as monthly pension/family