Executive order imposing prospective pension revision and freezing dearness allowance for retired transport employees is invalid as it overrides statutory pension rules.

ORDER

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, after calling for the records pertaining to the order dated 17.02.2023 passed by the first respondent in Letter No.2048/E1/2022-2, quash the same in so far as the conditions imposed and directions issued in Sub Para 1(a) and (b) and consequently direct the respondents to pay the petitioner the arrears of revised monthly pension for the period from 01.05.2022 to 31.03.2023 with interest and to pay the petitioner dearness allowance at the rates as applicable to the serving workmen of the State Transport Corporation from 01.05.2020 and as revised from time to time, as may be fixed by this Court.

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner joined the service of the second respondent Corporation as a Conductor on 08.12.1993 and he retired from service on 30.04.2020 on attaining the age of superannuation. The wage revision settlement with effect from 01.09.2019 was signed on 24.08.2022 and the monetary benefits were agreed to be paid from 01.01.2022 and the settlement was made applicable to all the regular and permanent workmen who were in service as on 31.08.2019. Hence, the petitioner is also entitled to get pay revision as per the above settlement from 01.09.2019 to 30.04.2020.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submitted that though the petitioner retired on 30.04.2020, PF, Gratuity and earned leave salary were paid to the petitioner only during April, 2022 as per the last drawn salary of the petitioner and not as per the settlement dated 24.08.2022. The fourth respondent revised the petitioner’s monthly pension only from April, 2023 and the arrears of difference in pension was not paid to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner made representation dated 02.12.2023 to the respondents 2 to 4 seeking to pay the difference in gratuity and earned leave salary and arrears of difference in pension, pursuant to which, the impugned order was passed by the first respondent.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submitted that the issue involved in the writ petition is covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Division Bench of the Madurai Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD) No.1240 of 2023 ( The Administrator, TNSTC Employees Pension Trust and two others Vs. Pokkuvarthu Kazhaka Oyvu Petra Aluvalar Nala Sangam, Kovai and three others ) dated 13.09.2023 and the said decision was also confirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court.

5.The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 4 submitted that the respondent Corporation is a Government undertaking company and hence the respondent has to strictly follow the rules and regulations of the Government. The learned counsel further submitted that based on the 14^th wage settlement, the first respondent have issued a direction to the revision of pension in the letter dated 17.02.2023 as the revision of pension to the pensioners/ family pensioners who have retired/ voluntarily retired/ expired between 01.09.2019 and 31.07.2022 from the services of all the State Transport Undertakings covered under 12(3) wage settlement (14^th wage settlement) subject to the following conditions:

‘(a)The revision pension shall be disbursed prospectively even though the last pay drawn of the erstwhile Transport Employees who retired between 01.09.2019 and 31.07.2022 have undergone revision due to implementation of 14^th wage settlement signed on 24.08.2022 with notional effect from 01.09.2019.

(b)Dearness allowance at present rate i.e @5% shall be continued without any change.’

6.The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 4 further submitted that the fourth respondent strictly followed the Government letter regarding the revision of pension as per the 14^th wage settlement and further submitted that the fourth respondent is the appropriate authority for payment of arrears in difference of pension.

7.Heard the arguments advanced on either side