Classification of pensioners into separate categories based on retirement cut-off dates for the purpose of granting pension revisions is arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, as all pensioners constitute a single class entitled to uniform treatment regarding cost-of-living adjustments.

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Judgment On Board

19/02/2025

1) By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s):-

10.1 It is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly he pleased to call for the entire reconts pertaining to petitioners' case for its kind perusal

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ quashing and setting aside the impugried order 28/02/2018 (Annexure P/-fssued by the Finance Department, Government of Chhattisgarh by declaring the same to be illegal and inoperative in law.

10.3 This Hon'ble Court may further kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ of mandamus directing the respondents to revise and consolidate the pension/family pension payable to the petitioners by complying with and giving effect to the para 4.2 of the Notification 18.09.2008 approved and adopted for implementation by the State Government vide ita decision dated 18.09.2008 (संकल्प).

10.4 This Hon'ble Court may further kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the petitioners i.c. pre-2006 retirees arrears of pension from 01.01.2006 to 31.08.2008, along with interest.

10.5 Any other relief/reliefs, which this Hon'ble Court may think Jelit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of the petition, may also please be granted to the petitioners

10.6. That, the circular dated 31.08.2009 to the extent that there is no provision with regard to fixing of pension on revised pay scale is against the "Sankalp" and notifications issued by the Government of India and discriminative as such liable to be quashed by the Hon'ble Court.

10.7. That, the respondent State be kindly directed to frame pension rules in conformity with the "Sankalp" at per with Govt. Servent who retired on or after 1/1/2006 so that pensioner may not suffer any loss on account of revision of pay of pension after implementation of 6th pay commission.

2) Facts of the present case are that the pensioners of Government Colleges are members of petitioner-society and they have claimed benefits of 6^th Pay Commission. It is pleaded that members of petitioner society, who retired after 01.01.2006 have been extended benefits of 6^th Pay Commission whereas the members, who retired from services prior to 01.01.2006 have not been extended the aforestated benefit. Earlier, WP(S) No. 5333 of 2012 was filed by the petitioner-society, which was disposed of vide order dated 25.01.2018 reserving liberty in favor of the petitioner-society to make a representation before the respondent authorities. Pursuant to the order dated 25.01.2018, the petitioner-society made a representation which was rejected by respondent No. 2 vide order dated 28.02.2018.

3) Learned counsel appearing for petitioner-society would submit that the State Government cannot create two classes of pensioners, namely, government servants who retired prior to 01.01.2006 and after 01.01.2006. He further submits that such classification is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In support thereof, he has placed reliance on the judgment rendered by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the matter of Dr. Surendra Narayan Gupta Versus Principal Secretary, State of M.P. & Ors. and other connected matters reported in 2024 SCC OnLine MP 4684

4) On the other hand, learned State counsel would submit that the State of Chhattisgarh was carved out on 01.01.2000 and the liability was apportioned between the two states according to the Madhya Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2000 . He further submits that the members of petitioner society who retired prior to 01.0