Delhi High Court
Bhoop Singh vs Union Of India & Ors. on 7 October, 2015
$~4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 1650/2015
% Decided on : 07.10.2015
BHOOP SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.A.K.Trivedi and Mr.Ashok K.Vij,
Advocates
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Vikram Jetly, CGSC with
Mr.Ankur Chhibber, Advocate &
Mr.Vijay Raut.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA
MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT)
1. The petitioner's grievance is that he has been fixed in the wrong stage
of the pension resulting in loss of pension and the other benefits.
2. The petitioner initially retired as on 06.09.1991 as an Inspector in the
pay scale of `1600-2900. With effect from 01.01.1996, the replacement
scale was `5500-9000. This was subsequently revised on 10.10.1997 to
`6500-10500. With the VIth Pay Commission's recommendations, the pay
scale in respect of the equivalent applicable grade (from which the petitioner
had retired) was fixed at `9300-34800 with `4200/- grade pay. The
petitioner had approached this court by way of the present writ petition
complaining that the pension fixed consequent to the VIth Pay Commission
was on a wrong basis and instead of `7215/- the corresponding pension of
W.P.(C) No.1650/2015 Page 1
`8145/- with reference to the original pay scale of `6500-10500 (i.e. pre-
revised pay scale) was applicable. This court had on 23.02.2015, for the
reasons recorded, rejected the petition. The petitioner felt aggrieved and
claimed that the dismissal was contrary to the record and filed
R.P.226/2015. That review petition was allowed on 11.09.2015 and the writ
petition was restored for hearing on merits. The order of the court is as
follows:
"1. Having perused Annexure P-1 and the Fitment Table we
find that those who were in the pay scale `5000-9000 as
also those who were in the pay scale `6500-10500 have
been placed in PB-2 : `9300-34800 with Grade Pay `4200,
but for purposes of pension there would be a difference. The
minimum pension for those who came to PB-2 with
reference to pay scale `6500-10500 is `8145/- and those
who came to PB-2 with reference to pay scale `5500-9000
their minimum pension is `7215/-.
2. This aspect of the matter has clearly been overlooked by
this Bench when order dated February 23, 2015 was
passed. Thus R.P.No.226/2015 is allowed. Order dated
February 23, 2015 is recalled.
3. Writ petition is restored for hearing on merits.
4. The writ petition shall be listed before the Roster Bench
for directions on October 07, 2015."
3. We have considered the submissions of the parties. It is not in dispute
that the petitioner retired on 06.07.1991 and was at that time in the pay scale
of `1600-2900. He was consequently permitted retiring pension at `968/-
per month. After implementation of the 5 th Pay Commission the pay scale
corresponding `1600-2900 was `5500-9000. His pension was therefore
revised to `2936/- on 01.01.1996. Apparently, in the meanwhile the pay
scale - in respect of the grade from which the petitioner retired - underwent
W.P.(C) No.1650/2015 Page 2
a change inasmuch as it was revised to `6500-10500 sometime in 1997.
When the VIth Pay Commission recommendations were made, the
petitioner's pension was re-fixed on the assumption that his last drawn
salary was in the grade equivalent to `5500-9000. This was clearly
erroneous because he was actually drawing salary as per a scale equivalent
to `6500-10500 by virtue of the subsequent order made in 1997. It is
therefore evident that the petitioner is entitled to higher pension at `8145/-
according to the Fitment Table placed on record.
4. In view of the above discussion, the writ petition has to succeed. The
respondents are directed to consider the record and make consequential
alterations within eight weeks from today and ensure that the differential
pension/arrears are disbursed to the petitioner within 12 weeks.
5. The writ petition is allowed in the above terms.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT
(JUDGE)
DEEPA SHARMA
(JUDGE)
OCTOBER 07, 2015
rb
W.P.(C) No.1650/2015 Page 3
