IMPORTANT POINTS
The pension in the case of the Chairman of Tribunal can only be in addition to the pension which the petitioner has been drawing by virtue of his service rendered as a High Court Judge. Section 8 does not provide that a person, who is getting pension at the rate fixed in Rule 2 of the Schedule will not be entitled to any pension or that there is any ceiling with reference to the previous service rendered as a High Court Judge.

JUDGMENT :

The petitioner, who retired from the post of Chairman of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal on 03.09.2015, is aggrieved by the condition fixed in Ext.P5 order in which Government ordered that pension and other benefits of the Chairman, Kerala Administrative Tribunal shall be fixed as follows:

“(i) An amount of Rs.34,350/-for each completed year of service i.e Rs.14,313/-(Rs.34,350 x 5/12) per month as pension with effect from 4.9.2015 and Rs.96,254/-for each completed year of service i.e Rs.40,218/-(Rs.96,254 x 5/12) per month as pension with effect from 1.1.2016 subject to the condition that the current pension and pre-pension taken together should not exceed 50% of the salary of the highest post he held while in service.

(ii) DCRG will be 10 days of salary for each completed service of six months subject to the condition that DCRG of pre-service and current service together should be limited to the maximum DCRG of High Court Judges.”

2. The grievance is as against the condition stipulated in clause (i) to the effect that the monthly pension would be subject to the condition that the current pension and pre-pension taken together should not exceed 50% of the salary of the highest post he held while in service.

3. The petitioner was a Judge of this Court and he retired on 11.04.2010 after rendering service of 8 years and 6 months and he has been drawing pension since then. It is stated that the Kerala Administrative Tribunal was constituted under Section 4(2) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 ('the the Act 1985' for short) as per G.O. (Ms).No.9/08/P&ARD dated 29.11.2008 and the Tribunal was established on 25.08.2010. The petitioner was appointed as Chairman of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal (KAT) as per order dated 25.08.2010 and took charge of the post on 03.09.2010. The appointment was for a period of 5 years. Petitioner retired as Chairman of the Tribunal on 03.09.2015.

4. As no steps were taken for fixing his pensionary benefits even after years of his retirement, petitioner had approached this court filing W.P.(C) No.8416 of 2017. The said writ petition was disposed of as per Ext.P2 judgment dated 14.03.2017 directing the 1st respondent – the Union of India, to consider the representation submitted by him and to pass orders thereon after seeking clarifications on the request made by him. Thereafter Government of India issued Ext.P3 order on 11.05.2017 in which it was stated as follows:

“4. After insertion of Section 8(3) of the AT Act, 1985 vide amendment in 2006, the service conditions of the Chairman and Members appointed on or after 19.02.2007 are made equivalent to those of the Judges of the High Court, hence Section 10 of the AT Act, 1985, is no more applicable. Thus, the necessary action to fix the pensionary benefits of Chairmen and Members of CAT and SATs are taken by the concerned authorities as the case may be and not by the Central Government.”

5. By the very same order, Government of India requested the Government of Kerala to take necessary action to fix the pensionary benefits of the petitioner within the stipulated time. The Government of India have also filed a petition for extension of time. During the pendency of the said proceedings the 1st respondent issued Ext.P4 order on 14.08.2018, in which it was stated as follows:

“4. After AT (amendment) Act, 2006, process to frame new rules prescribing the conditions of service of Chairman & Members of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) was initiated in consultation with the Department of Legal Affairs and Department of Expenditure. However, the same could not be finalized / notified as the Department of Legal Affairs was considering to frame a blanket rules on uniformity in the tenure, retirement age, status, term of Members of various offices etc. of Chairpersons / Presidents of Tribunals etc. for all the Tribunals. Thus, in consultation with the Department of Expenditure, the pay scales & allowances of Chairman and Members of the CAT were rev