HON’BLE MRS. JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA WRI T PETI TI ON No.17251 OF 2023

ORDER:

Heard Sri S.Gopal Rao, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I I appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:

“…to issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, by declaring the action the respondents in not releasing pension and other pensionary benefits including Gratuity, E.L. arrears and PRC arrears, though he retired from service on 31- 01-2021, on attaining the age of superannuation, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to release pension and other pensionary benefits including Gratuity, E.L. arrears and PRC arrears, to the petitioner, with interest and to pass…”

3. It is specific case of the petitioner that the respondents are not releasing pension and other pensionary benefits including Gratuity, E.L. arrears and PRC arrears, though petitioner retired from service on 31.01.2021, on attaining the age of superannuation, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India.

Aggrieved by the said action of the respondents, the present Writ Petition is filed.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits the petitioner superannuated on 27.01.2021 as Office Subordinate in the office of the Collector, Mahabubabad on attaining the age of superannuation i.e., 60 years on 31.01.2021. Thereafter, the petitioner had been making repeated requests for release of the pension and other pensionary benefits including Gratuity, E.L. arrears and PRC arrears of the petitioner, but however the respondents have not initiated any steps in considering the plea of the petitioner for release of the pension and other pensionary benefits including Gratuity, E.L. arrears and PRC arrears in accordance to law. The 3^rd respondent failed to discharge his duties of submitting the bills regarding pension and other pensionary benefits including Gratuity, E.L. arrears and PRC arrears pertaining to the petitioner and the 3^rd respondent did not initiate the required steps in time denying the benefits of the pension other pensionary benefits including Gratuity, E.L. arrears and PRC arrears of the petitioner.

5. The Apex Court in the judgment passed in Deokinandan Prasad Vs. State of Bihar and Others reported in 1971 (2) SCC 330 held that pension is not a bounty. I n the said judgment, it is observed as under:-

“ But we agree with the view of the majority when it has approved its earlier decision that pension is not a bounty payable on the sweet will and pleasure of the Government and that, on the other hand, the right to pension is a valuable right vesting in a government servant.”

6. I n D.S.Nakara and Others Vs. UOI reported in 1983 (2) SCR 165, it had been observed as under:-

Pension to Civil employees of the Government and the defence personnel as administered in India appears to be a compensation for service rendered in the past.

7. I n Bharat Petroleum (Erstwhile Burmah Shell) Management Staff Vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and Others reported in 1988 (3) SCC 32, the Apex Court observed as under:-

“Pension is no longer considered as a bounty and it has been held to be property. In a welfare state as ours, rise in the pension of the retired personnel who are otherwise entitled to, it is accepted by the State and the State has taken the liability.

8. The Apex Court in the judgment reported in 1992 Suppl 1 664 in All I ndia Reserve Bank Retired Officers Association and Others Vs. UOI observed as under:-

“The concept of pension is now well known and has been clarified by this Court time and again. It is not a charity or bounty nor is it gratuitous payment solely dependent on the whim or sweet will of the employer. It is earned for ren