The court affirmed the right to restore commuted pensions following guidelines set by precedents and statutes, quashing prior denials.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Sandeep Moudgil, J.

The petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 11.10.2007 (Annexure P4) and the order dated 12.09.2008 (Annexure P9) vide which the respondent-Nigam has not restored the pension of the petitioner when the commuted value of the pension stands recovered by way of non-payment of pension and other allowances. He also seeks a direction to the respondents to grant pensionary benefits to the petitioner as per the pension papers submitted by him or alternatively, to restore the commuted pension from the date when its full value has been recovered including notional interest, along with arrears of the amount due along with 12% interest.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner joined the erstwhile Haryana State Electricity Board as Accounts Officer on 10.11.1989 and was promoted as Sr.Accounts Officer on 10.11.1995. Thereafter, the petitioner was given additional charge of Company Secretary on 30.11.1998 who earned another promotion as Chief Accounts Officer on 06.07.2000.

3. In the year 2005, the petitioner applied, through proper channel, and was selected for the post of Chief (Finance and Accounts) in Rural Electrification Corporation Limited (REC), a Government of India Enterprise. On 07.12.2005, he represented the respondent No.1 to conform regarding grant of pensionary benefits etc. as per provisions of CSR (Annexure P-33) followed by representations dated 19.12.2005 (Annexure P-34) and dated 27.12.2005 (Annexure P-35). The respondent-corporation vide letter dated 14.01.2006 (Annexure P1) confirmed the payment of pensionary benefits and as such, the petitioner submitted his resignation under Rule 4.19(b) of PUNJAB CIVIL SERVICES RULES Vol.II on 14.01.2006 to join Rural Electrification Corporation Ltd. (Annexure P-36). The petitioner was confirmed in REC vide letter dated 16.03.2007 (Annexure P-2). However, the respondent-corporation vide order dated 11.10.2007 (Annexure P9), decided to pay the pensionary benefits in lumpsum whereas the petitioner submitted pension papers for payment of monthly pension (Annexure P-4). The petitioner submitted representation on 18.02.2008 (Annexure P-5) for payment of monthly pension instead of pension in lump-sum and for restoration of commuted pension (Annexures P-6 to P-8) but the same were rejected vide impugned letter dated 12.09.2008 (Annexure P-9).

4. The petitioner filed CWP No.17401 of 2008 for restoration of pension, which was decided on 13.09.2010 (Annexure P-19) in terms of decision of this Court dated 12.08.2010 passed in SP Wadhawan v. HVPN & Ors. (CWP No.16697 of 1998) and other connected cases (Annexure P-18) directing the respondents to decide the issue within 6 months. Even thereafter the petitioner has been representing for restoration of commuted pension (Annexures P-21 & P-22) but till date no steps have been taken by the respondents. Hence, this writ petition.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Haryana Govt. vide letter dated 02.06.1989 (Annexure P13) had allowed restoration of commuted portion of pension even to those who sought premature retirement or were retired compulsorily before the age of superannuation, after full value of commutation, and also notional interest stands recovered. He further highlighted that the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, vide memo dated 30.09.1996 (Annexure P15), in compliance with the directions of the Supreme Court in Writ Petition (C) No.11855/1985 "Welfare Association of Absorbed Central Govt. Employees in Public Sector Enterprises and others v. Union of India , AIR 1996 SC 1201 , decided that the benefit of restoration of commuted pension shall be admissible to all those Government employees who had been absorbed in Public Sector Undertaking/auton