Back
2009 Supreme(P&H) 452
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Jasbir Singh and Jaswant Singh JJ.
Sham Lal Sharma(Retd.)
Versus
Union Of India
C.W.P. No. 3312 of 2007,
C.W.P. No. 4821 of 2007,
C.W.P. No. 8640 of 2007,
C.W.P. No. 8939 of 2007,
C.W.P. No. 17863 of 2007,
C.W.P. No. 14814 of 2007,
C.W.P. No. 11227 of 2008,
Decided On : MARCH 6, 2009
The main legal point established in the judgment is that ex-Armed forces personnel are not entitled to restoration of their commuted value of pension after thirteen years by adding weightage of two years of purchase value, as per the Pension Regulation for the Army, 1961 and the directions given in the judgment rendered by the Honble Supreme Court in 'Common Cause' A Registered Society & others vs. Union of lndia & Others, 1987(1) Service Law Reporter 206.
Headnote:
Pension Restoration - Armed Forces Personnel - Pension Regulation for the Army, 1961 (paras 341-344) - The judgment addresses the entitlement of ex-Armed forces personnel to restoration of their commuted value of pension after a certain period. The court discusses the provisions of the Pension Regulation for the Army, 1961 and the directions given in the judgment rendered by the Honble Supreme Court in 'Common Cause' A Registered Society & others vs. Union of lndia & Others, 1987(1) Service Law Reporter 206. The court concludes that the petitioners are not entitled to restoration of their commuted value of pension after thirteen years by adding weightage of two years of purchase value.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves ex-Armed forces personnel seeking restoration of their commuted value of pension after a certain period. The petitioner retired as Lt. Col. and was granted full pension based on basic pay plus rank pay. The dispute revolves around the restoration of commuted portion of the pension after a specific period.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the petitioners are not entitled to restoration of their commuted value of pension after thirteen years by adding weightage of two years of purchase value. The court also rejected the prayer to modify/amend the notification dated 5th March, 1987 and to set aside para 344(b) of the Pension Regulations.
Issues: The main issue was whether the ex-Armed forces personnel are entitled to restoration of their commuted value of pension after thirteen years by adding weightage of two years of purchase value.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the Pension Regulation for the Army, 1961 and the directions given in the judgment rendered by the Honble Supreme Court in 'Common Cause' A Registered Society & others vs. Union of lndia & Others, 1987(1) Service Law Reporter 206. The court concluded that the petitioners are not entitled to restoration of their commuted value of pension after thirteen years by adding weightage of two years of purchase value.
Final Decision: The court held that the petitioners are not entitled to restoration of their commuted value of pension after thirteen years by adding weightage of two years of purchase value. The prayers to modify/amend the notification dated 5th March, 1987 and to set aside para 344(b) of the Pension Regulations were also rejected.
Jaswant Singh, J.
1. This judgment shali dispose of eight writ petitions bearing numbers CWP No. 3312 of 2007, CWP No. 4821 of 2007, CWP No. 8640 of 2007, CWP No. 10165 of 2007, CWP No. 8939 of 2007, CWP No. 17863 of 2007, CWP No. 14814 of 2007 and CWP No. 11227 of 2008 as they involve identical facts and common questions of law.
2. The Short question involved in these writ petitions is as to whether the petitioners, who are Ex-Armed forces personnel, are entitled to restoration of their commuted.value of pension after fifteen years of the retirement or thirteen years after adding weightage of two years purchase value of commuted pension, in terms of the directions given in the judgment rendered by the Honble Supreme Court in "Common Cause" A Registered Society & others vs. Union of lndia & Others, 1987(1) Service Law Reporter 206. (Annexure P-1).
3. For the sake of brevity and with the consent of the counsel for the parties, the facts from CWP No. 3312 of 2007 have been taken and dealt with.
The petitioner joined the Indian Army as Commissioned Officer on 3rd of May, 1964 and retired as Lt. Col. on 30.11.1991. Petitioner was granted füll pension for the service rendered in the Army and he has been drawing his pension from Respondent No. 4-Chief Controller of Defence Accounts (Pensions), Defence Accounts Officers, Allahabad. Petitioner was issued pension payment Orders (for Short PPO) which contains details and particulars of pensionary benefits of the petitioner. He was granted and sanctioned füll pension, based upon basic pay plus rank pay held on the date of retirement in accordance with the pension regulations. It is stated that the pension of the petitioner was determined on the principle of one half of füll basic pay being drawn by the petitioner during service plus other consequential benefits of service thereto and the petitioner was also granted commutation upto 43% of füll pension which was granted to htm for the period of 12.35 years as he retired at the age of 52 years and in this way petitioner was granted pension @ Rs. 2528/- (1/2 of Basic Pay) which was worked out on the füll Basic Pay of Rs. 5055/-.
4. Pension of the Army personnel is governed by provisions of Pension Regulation for the Army, 1961 (amended in 1981) (for Short Regulation of 1961) and the commutation of pension for the Army personnel is further described in the provisions of paras 341-344 of Regulation of 1961 (extracted at Annexure P-4 along with the table). It is further stated that the petitioner being Commissioned Officer was also entitled to commute a lump sum payment of portion not exceeding 43% (for officers) of his full pension as described in table appended under para 341 -344 and the amount of value of commutation of pension was determined in accordance with the table which is further considered for the number of years called as "purchase years" in the table accordingly.
5. That prior to the year 1986 there were no provisions or rules for the restoration of full pension after the expiry of a particular period of weightage or purchase years of commuted pension for the Central Government employees including the Armed Forces, and a Provision existed for Converting a portion of pension into a lump sum amount and thereafter receiving oniy the balance amount for the rest of the life. It is not disputed that in case of the Central Government employees, the total amount of pension which could/can be commuted is upto one-third while in the case of the Defence Services upto 43% (in case of officers) and upto 45% in case of other ranks.lt is only after the Intervention of the Honble Supreme Court in Common Causes case (supra) that the Central Government introduced the scheme for restoration of commuted portion of the pension.
6. Therefore, the petitioner is praying for directions to the respondents to uniformfy implement the judgment dated 09.12.2006 rendered by the Honble Supreme Court in "Common Cause" A Registered Society (supra) (Annex
