ACCOUNTANT GENERAL OF ORISSA Vs. R RAMAMURTY
LAWS(SC)-2006-11-111
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on November 29,2006

ACCOUNTANT GENERAL OF ORISSA Appellant
VERSUS
R.RAMAMURTY Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

P V SUNDARA RAJAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & OTHERS VS. RANJIT CHANDRA BARDHAN & OTHERS [LAWS(CAL)-2016-8-2] [REFERRED TO]
THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, M P VS. S K DUBEY [LAWS(SC)-2012-2-52] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)Leave granted.
(2.)Challenge in these appeals is to a judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Petition No.8532 of 2003. The said writ petition had been filed by the appellants questioning correctness of the decision rendered by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench (in short the 'CAT') in O.A.No. 1345 of 2001. The basic issue which arose for consideration in the writ petition was "what is the mode of calculating of restoration of pension in respect of employees covered by Rule 37A of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 (in short the 'Rules'). According to the appellants, a conjoint reading of Rules 37 and 37A as operated upto 31.3.1995 has not been kept in view. The High Court modified the order of the CAT and held that in a case where an employee had commuted minimum permissible pension i.e. 1/3 and even where lesser portion is commuted, the pro rata commuted portion has to be deducted from the basic pension to arrive at restorable pension, but however, he will get dearness relief, interim relief etc. on full basic pension.
(3.)The High Court arrived at the aforesaid conclusion after considering Rules 37 and 37A.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.