Delhi High Court
Surender Singh vs Union Of India & Ors. on 21 August, 2017
20
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ WP(C) 1494/2017
Date of decision: 21st August, 2017
SURENDER SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Rajsingh Bhagat, Adv.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.P.C.Yadav, Adv. For R-1 to 3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
SANJIV KHANNA, J. (Oral)
The petitioner, Surender Singh by this writ petition seeks
quashing of order dated 16th February, 2015 and the unit service
order Part-II No.325/2013 dated 19th September, 2013. The
petitioner has also prayed for direction to the respondents to restore
pay fixation of the petitioner vide unit service order no.721/2011
dated 29th October, 2011.
2. The petitioner was appointed as Sub-Inspector in the Central
Industrial Security Force (CISF for short) on 2nd August, 1991.
3. On completion of 12 years of service, the petitioner was
granted financial up gradation under Assured Career Progression
Scheme (ACPS for short) vide order dated 17th - 18th October, 2003
WP(C) 1494/2017 Page 1
issued by the Airport Security Grade (ASG), Ahmadabad (Gujarat).
Subsequently, the petitioner was promoted to the Grade of
Inspector in March, 2006.
4. After completion of 20 years of regular service, the petitioner
was granted second financial up gradation under the Modified
Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACP for short) on 29th
October, 2011.
5. The petitioner in completion of approximately 22 years of
service, made an application seeking voluntary retirement on 16th
July, 2013.
6. The respondents while processing the application for
voluntary retirement came to the conclusion that the petitioner
should not have been given benefit of exercise of option under
Fundamental Rule 22 (1)(a) (i) and accordingly, directions were
issued to deduct an amount of Rs.50,672/- from the gratuity, vide
office order dated 15th November, 2013. This is also had the effect
of reducing the pension payable to the petitioner from Rs.12230/- to
Rs.11,990/-. The petitioner is aggrieved by reduction of pension
from Rs.12,230/- to Rs.11,990/- as also the recovery of Rs.50,672/-.
7. The stand of the respondents in the counter affidavit is
somewhat ambiguous. They have stated that as per the
Fundamental Rule 22, all fixations are done after obtaining option
from the individual and once the option is exercised, the same
cannot be changed at a later date. The petitioner was wrongly
WP(C) 1494/2017 Page 2
permitted to shift the date of increment from 3rd August, 2003 to 1st
January, 2004 vide amendment order dated 29th October, 2011.
This change was not in accordance with law i.e. Fundamental Rule
22 and, therefore, was bad and contrary to law.
8. The respondents have also accepted that they had scrutinized
the records to find out whether any option form or request for
option was given by the petitioner at the time when he was granted
financial up gradation under the ACP Scheme with effect from 3rd
August, 2003. No option form could be located.
9. As per Office Memorandum no.13/2/97 Estt. dated 12th
December, 1997 such option should have been incorporated in the
promotion order or the order granting financial up gradation. The
said position was reiterated in the OM dated 10th August, 2007.
10. In these circumstances, we do not think the respondents were
justified and correct in reducing pension of the petitioner from
Rs.12230/- to Rs.11990/- and issuing the direction to recover Rs.
Rs.50,672/- from the gratuity payable to the petitioner.
11. Resultantly, the writ petition succeeds and the respondents
are directed to refund payment of Rs.50,672/-, which recovery, in
our opinion, was not in consonance with the mandate of the
judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Punjab vs. Rafiq Masih
(White Washer) etc., AIR 2015 SC 696. The petitioner as noticed
above had sought voluntary retirement vide application dated 16th
WP(C) 1494/2017 Page 3
July, 2013. We also hold that the pension payable to the petitioner
should not be reduced from Rs.12230/- to Rs.11990/-
12. Compliance of the aforesaid directions would be made by the
respondents within three months from the date a copy of this order
is received. In case compliance is not made within the said period,
the respondents would be liable to pay interest @8% per annum on
the aforesaid amount of Rs.50,672/- and also the arrears towards
pension from the date of this order till payment is made.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of, with no order as
to costs.
SANJIV KHANNA, J
NAVIN CHAWLA, J
AUGUST 16, 2017
RN
WP(C) 1494/2017 Page 4
