M.K. BAKSHY Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner who joined service as Airman on 11th March, 1949 and continued till 2nd July, 1965, by this he rendered service for 16 years 114 days as pre-Commissioned employee. The petitioner, thereafter, served as a Squadron leader from 3rd July, 1965 till his date of retirement i.e. 30th April, 1978 rendering 12 years and 302 days service as commissioned Officer. The total service as pre-commissioned employee and as commissioned officer becomes to 29 years and 51 days. As per Rules, the petitioner was entitled for weightage of eight years' service and therefore, his actual period of service comes to 37 years and 51 days at the time of retirement i.e. as on 30th April, 1978. As per rules, the petitioner's pre- commissioned services was to be credited only ⅔ of his actual service, therefore, out of 16 years 114 days of pre-commissioned service of the petitioner 10 years 315 days of service was taken into account along with actual service of 12 years 302 days rendered as commissioned officer added by 8 years as weightage given to the petitioner. By this calculation the petitioner was treated as having completed 31 years 252 days of service. The employee, who renders service for more than 20 years or more is eligible for the purpose of getting benefit of pension under the relevant rules, therefore, on retiring on 30th April, 1978, the petitioner was given benefit of pension as well as gratuity. The petitioner is getting this pensionary benefit from 30th April, 1978 till today. For this, there is no dispute between the parties.

(3.) According to the petitioner, as per the Fourth Central Pay Commission Report, a policy decision was taken and therein, it is provided that the employees of the respondents, who retired on or after 1st Jan., 1986 will get benefit of full pre-commissioned service but the employees who retired before the 1st Jan., 1986 their services will continue to be counted ⅔ for the purpose of pension, meaning thereby the petitioner who retired before 1st Jan., 1986 his services continued to be counted for the purpose of pension not actually rendered, but ⅔ of the actual service. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, at that time since the petitioner was given benefit of the pension, therefore, he had no grievance of counting of the pre-commissioned service rendered by the petitioner upto the extent of ⅔ only of the actual service rendered but when the Fifth Central Pay Commission recommendations were notified by the Government of India and the sanction of the President was accorded to revision of the pension/ordinary family pension w.e.f. 1st Jan., 1996 in respect of all pre-1986/pre-1996 Armed Forces Pensioners/ordinary family pensioners who were receipts of pensions as provided in the said decision as on 1st Jan., 1996, in the manner indicated in letter dated 27th May, 1998 (Ex.R/2), then denial of counting past ⅓ services of the petitioner became adverse order to the petitioner. The petitioner is feeling aggrieved against the decision taken in the policy decision of Fourth Central Pay Commission Report whereby petitioner's pre-commissioned service to the extent of ⅔ of actual rendered service was only to be counted. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, it was decided in recommendation of the Fifth Central Pay Commission Report to treat alike those who retired on or after 1st Jan., 1986 with the persons, who retired before 1st Jan., 1986 but while doing so no care was taken for removing disparity faced by the employees in counting their past pre-commissioned service, who retired before 1st Jan. 1986 and the service rendered by the employees before 1st Jan., 1986 are still counted for the purpose of pension, ⅔ of the actual service rendered.