RAGHU NATH KAUL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FACTS necessary for the disposal of his writ petition is serialized. i) the petitioner on attaining the age of superannuation retired on 31st of March I978; ii) the petitioner commuted his pension at a fixed amount of Rs. 150/ -. This was out of his original pension of Rs. 475/ -. iii) later on there was increase in the pension.

(2.) , The petitioner submits that when there was increase in the pension, there should have been a corresponding increase in the commuted pension also. This is the basic grievance of the petitioner. It is urged that when there was increase in the pension and when this increase was with retrospective effect i.e. from 31st of March 1978. then there should have been corresponding increase in the commuted value of the pension also. For this basic reliance is being placed on Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services Commutation of Pension Rules, 1981, Rule 10 on which reliance is being placed reads as under - "Retrorpective revision of final pension. An applicant who has commuted a fraction of his final pension and after commutation his pension has been revised and enhanced retrospectively as a result of Governments decision, the applicant shall be paid the difference between the commuted value determined with reference to enhanced pension and the commuted value already authorised. For the payment of difference the applicant shall not be required to apply afresh: Provided that in the case of an applicant who has commuted a fraction of his original pension not exceeding rupees one hundred after being declared fit by a Civil Surgeon or a District Medical Officer and as a result of retrospective enhancement of pension, he becomes eligible to commute an amount exceeding one hundred rupees per mensem, he shall be allowed the difference between the commuted value of one hundred rupees per mensem and the commuted value of the fraction of the original pension without further medical examination. The commutation of any furt her amount beyond rupees one hundred per mensem shall be treated as fresh commutation and allowed subject to examination by a Medical Officer,"

(3.) A plain reading of the above Rule would make it apparent: i) that in case there is revision in the pension then benefit of this is to be given in the commuted value also. ii) that for getting this benefit a person who has commuted a fraction of his final pension need not apply; iii) that in case of a person who has commuted a fraction of his original pension to the extent to Rs. 100/ - after having being declared fit by a Civil Surgeon, then he can be allowed further benefit of medical examination: This is so provided in the proviso,