S.S. CHOUDHARY Vs. STATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for following relief:

(2.) The admitted facts between the parties are that the petitioner applied for commutation of pension w.e.f. 24.08.200 After completion of 15 years from the said date, the petitioner's pension should have been restored and commutation should have been stopped, but respondents have not done so and on the contrary started recovering the amount w.e.f. August, 200 Mr. Navneet Dubey placed reliance on Rule 5 of the M.P. Civil Services (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1996 and contended that as per Sub-rule (4) no commutation is permissible after 15 years from the date of retirement or attaning of 70 years of age, which ever is earlier. Mr. Dubey further contended that since petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.03.2000, no commutation was permissible after March, 2015. Hence, the impugned action is called in question whereby the respondents continued the commutation beyond the said period.

(3.) Mr. Kherdikar submits that as per the additional return, it is clear that the petitioner was required to comply with the mandate of circulars dated 21.04.1986 (Annexure-R/1) and dated 31.02000 (Annexure-R/2). The petitioner's pension could have been restored after 15 years provided he filed an application through concerned RAO alongwith life certificate. In absence of filing such application, no fault can be found in the impugned order.