Kuldip Singh J. - (1.) The petitioner retired as a Civil Surgeon, Ambala, on 30.4.2001 on attaining the age of superannuation. While fixing his pension, the Non Practicing Allowance (in short 'NPA') was taken into account while calculating the average emoluments of last 10 months. Accordingly, his pension was fixed at Rs. 7,598/-, which was later on revised to Rs. 7,674/- i.e. basic pay at Rs. 16,300/- plus Rs. 900/- NPA plus Rs. 200/- special pay etc. In the meanwhile, on receipt of report of the 6th Central Pay Commission, which was followed by the Haryana Government and the new Haryana Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008, were promulgated by the Haryana Government, in which they were given revised pay scales with effect from 1.1.2006. Accordingly, in place of pay scale of Rs. 14300-400- 18300, from which the petitioner retired, was revised to the corresponding pay band/scale of Rs. 37,400-67,000 and the grade pay of Rs. 8,700/-. Thereafter, the Haryana Government notified the Haryana Civil Services (Revised Pension) Part-I Rules, 2009, wherein the NPA for counting the pensionary benefits was not taken into consideration. Subsequently, the Haryana Government issued the notification dated 26.4.2006 (Annexure-P-7), in which it was decided that the HCMS doctors retiring after 18.4.2006, the Non Practicing Allowance will be treated as a part of the pay within the meaning of Rule 6.19-C of Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume-II and will be counted for pensionary benefits. In case of HCMS doctors, who have already retired between 7.12.2001 to 17.4.2006, the Non Practicing Allowance will be admissible prospectively i.e. 18.4.2006 onwards. The said instructions (Annexure-P-7) were followed by another instructions dated 20.7.2009 (Annexure-P-9), in which, while referring to the earlier two instructions i.e. dated 26.4.2006 (Annexure-P-7) and dated 15.9.2006, it was decided that in case of the doctors, who retired between 1.4.2001 to 6.12.2001, the NPA will be treated as a part of the pension. However, the benefit will be notional from 1.4.2001 and the actual benefit will be admissible prospectively i.e. from the date of issuance of these instructions. In pursuance to the said instructions dated 20.7.2009 (Annexure-P-9), the pension of the petitioner was revised, vide order dated 17.3.2012 (Annexure-P-10), stating that the benefit of NPA on account of fixation of pension was erroneously given to the petitioner in the month of December, 2010, with effect from 1.10.2006 and the arrears of the revised pension has been accordingly revised. Now, CPPC have rectified the data and the excess pension arrears amounting to Rs. 5,41,021/- worked out with effect from 1.1.2006, are recoverable, stating that the pension disbursing authority is not authorised to sanction/revision of NPA, for which the pensioner will have to approach the pension sanctioning authority through his department. It also comes out that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court by way of filing CWP No. 6416 of 2012, which was disposed of by this Court on 21.7.2014 (Annexure-P-11), directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass a speaking order thereon. Accordingly, the speaking order dated 23.12.2014 (Annexure-P-13) was passed, whereby the claim of the petitioner was rejected, holding as under:- " Accordingly, I, Ramniwas, IAS, Additional Chief Secretary to Government Haryana, Health Department, Haryana, Chandigarh, do hereby reject the claim of the petitioner to add twenty five percent of Non Practicing Allowance in his revised pension as claimed by him in his representation dated 11.8.2014. Further in terms of letter dated 20.7.2009, benefit of NPA for calculating Pension is to be given to those retirees who have retired between 1.4.2001 to 6.12.2001, on notional basis and actual benefit is to be given with effect from issuance of those instructions, whereas Dr. Ramesh Kumar Patnaik, Civil Surgeon (Retired), i.e. the petitioner is getting the actual benefit of NPA in Pension from 1.5.2001 as he was retired on 30.4.2001 after attaining the age of superannuation. Pension Disbursing Authority i.e. concerned bank is hereby directed to take necessary action after adopting the due procedure. I pass the speaking order accordingly."
(2.) In the reply, the respondents have taken the stand that the petitioner is not covered under the provisions of instructions dated 26.4.2006 (Annexure-P-7) as these are applicable to the doctors, who have already retired from Government service between 7.12.2001 to 17.4.2006. The NPA was to be counted for revision of pension notionally and the actual benefit was admissible prospectively i.e. from 18.4.2006 onwards. The petitioner retired from service on 30.4.2001. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of instructions dated 26.4.2006. It was further stated that the case of the petitioner is covered under F.D. instructions dated 20.7.2009 (Annexure-P-9), which provides for counting the NPA for pensionary benefits to the doctors, who retired between 1.4.2001 to 6.12.2001. Therefore, he is entitled to notional benefit from 1.4.2001 and actual benefit is admissible prospectively i.e. from the date of issuance of those instructions i.e. 20.7.2009.
(3.) I have heard the learned counsels for the parties and have also carefully gone through the file.;