- (1.) Petitioner after serving the Indian Air Force for 33 years retired on March 31, 1973 as Air Marshal. With effect from April 28, 1973 he was appointed as member of the Punjab Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission) and after having served there for six years, retired on April 27, 1979.
(2.) The Punjab Government vide its notification No. GSR/Const./Article 318 (Amd)(8)/72 dated August 10, 1972 amended the Punjab Public Service Commission (Conditions of Service) Regulations, 1958 whereby Regulation 8 was substituted allowing pension to the members retiring with minimum three years service with the Commission. According to this notification Rs. 400/- were made admissible to a member as pension. This notification was further amended and the amount had been increased from Rs. 400/- to Rs. 500/-. Petitioner after retirement put in a claim for grant of pension under Regulation 8(3) of Punjab Public Service Commission (Conditions of Service) Regulations, 1958 as amended. The matter has not been finalised so far and the same is still under consideration with the State Government.
(3.) The petitioner filed the present writ petition because his representations have not been finalised in spite of repeated reminders. It seems that the State Government is not finalising the matter as the matter is squarely covered by a judgment of this Court in C.W.P. No. 6379 of 1986 (S.B. Narinder Singh v. The State of Punjab and ors.) decided on May 12, 1988 against which a Letters Patent Appeal is pending. In that case also, the contention of the State Government to the effect that member of the Commissioner who was appointed as such after retirement from service, is not entitled to pension under Regulation 8 sued to the State Government to grant pension under Regulation 8(3) of the Regulation with effect from August 10, 1972 at the rate of Rs. 400/- per annum and at such revised rates which were revised from time to time. Arrears of pension were also ordered to be paid with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum. The case in hand is identical in nature. The present writ petition is allowed in the same terms of the State Government is directed to release to the petitioner, who is otherwise entitled, pension under Regulation 8(3) with effect from April 28, 1973 at the rate of Rs. 500/- per annum or at such revised rates which were made admissible from time to time without prejudice to the final decision of the Letters Patent Appeal filed by the State as referred to above. The arrears of pension would be paid to the petitioner with interest @ 12 per cent per annum within two months. Costs Rs. 1000/-.;