Madras High Court
P.Thangappandi vs Union Of India on 11 August, 2023
W.P.No.19108 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.08.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD
Writ Petition No.19108 of 2021
P.Thangappandi ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.Union of India,
Rep. by The Director General of Police CRPF,
C.G.O Complex, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi – 110 003.
2.The Inspector General of Police
Imphal, Manipur – 795 113.
3.The Deputy Inspector General of Police,
GC CRPF,
Langjing, Imphal, Manipur – 795 113.
4.The Deputy Inspector General of Police,
GC CRPF Avadi, Chennai – 600 065.
5.The Commandant,
109 BN CRPF, Mayai Lambi Rd,
Mongshangei, Imphal, Manipur – 795 003. … Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying
for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents for re-fixation of
pension and payment of differential/arrears of retirement benefits including
Page No.1 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.19108 of 2021
pension and gratuity on the basis of enhanced retirement age of 60 years.
For Petitioner : A.Farhath Begum
For Respondents : Mr.V.T.Balaji,
Central Government Standing
Counsel
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking direction to
the respondents for re-fixation of pension and payment of differential/arrears
of retirement benefits including pension and gratuity on the basis of enhanced
retirement age of 60 years.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner enlisted in Central
Reserve Police Force on 01.06.1977. After completing 36 years of service,
the petitioner got superannuated from service on 31.05.2014. This being so,
the petitioner has issued a legal notice to the respondents on 25.10.2019 in
connection with extending pensionary benefits considering his retirement age
as 60 years. Subsequently, the respondents through their reply informed that
as per guidelines issued by MHA vide their order F.N.45020/1/2019/Legal-1
dated 19.08.2019 and DIG (Adm) Dte, CRPF, New Delhi letter No.R.IX-
1/2019-Adm.III(Rules) dated 18.09.2019, the officers/officials who
proceeded on superannuation with effect from 31.01.2019 to 19.08.2019 and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.19108 of 2021
opted to get benefit of fitment of pension on completion of age of 60 years
are only eligible for getting benefit of fitment of pension and the
officers/officials, who retired from service prior to 31.01.2019 are neither
entitled for re-instatement into service nor for getting benefit of pension on
completion of 60 years and they will remain governed by the age of 57 years
of retirement as per Rule 43(a) of CRPF Rules, 1955. Since the petitioner
proceeded on superannuation before 31.01.2019, he is not eligible to get
benefit accordingly.
3. This being so, one N.Murugan, who is a colleague of the petitioner
and superannuated on 30.04.2018 has sent a legal notice to the respondents
seeking the similar relief. Later, he received a reply from Deputy General of
Police, Group Centre, CRPF Avadi vide P-III-164/2017-G-AVD-Pension
dated 12.03.2021 that his case falls under the provision in compliance to the
common order dated 19.12.2019 of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in WP(C)
Nos.11895, 11332, 12323 of 2019, Ministry of Home Affairs vide their Order
No.F.N.45020/1/2019-Legal-1 dated 17.12.2020 read with order dated
19.08.2019 has conveyed the benefits of enhancement or age of retirement
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.19108 of 2021
from 57 to 60 years. However, the petitioner has not been considered for the
said benefits. Hence, he has come forward with the present writ petition.
4. When the matter was taken up for hearing learned counsel for the
petitioner drew the attention of this Court to paragraph Nos.70 & 72 of the
order passed by the Delhi High Court in the case of Dev Sharma Vs. Indo
Tibetan Border Police & Another in W.P.(C).No.1951 of 2012 dated
31.01.2019. For better appreciation, the relevant paragraphs are extracted
hereunder:
“70. The Court recognises that there are bound to be
implications both organisationally and financially as a result of
the implementation of this decision. The respondents shall,
unless this judgment is further challenged and subject to any
interim order in such proceedings, implement it across the
board to all members of the CAPFs without insisting on each of
them approaching the Court for identical relief. For that
matter, even though the members of the SSB have not yet
approached this Court, if they are identically placed as these
petitioners, it should be implemented for them as well”.
72. The Court clarifies that this judgment will not have
the effect of reinstatement of the petitioners who have already
retired. In view of the principle of 'no work, no pay', it will also
not have the effect of their being entitled to any arrears of pay
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.19108 of 2021
for any further period beyond their retirement. However, for the
purposes of calculation of retiral benefits, including pension and
gratuity, the differential period (in the event of enhancement of
retirement age) will be added to period of service actually
rendered by each of them. In other words, their notional date of
retirement would be arrived at by adding the differential years
to their actual date of retirement. On such calculation they
would be entitled to the arrears of retirement benefits after
adjusting the amount already paid.”
5. Hence, as per the aforesaid judgment, the petitioner is entitled to the
benefit of re-fixation of pension and payment of differential/arrears of
retirement benefits including pension and gratuity on the basis of enhanced
retirement age of 60 years.
6. Learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the
respondents submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to re-fixation of
pension scheme as the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi would
apply only to personnel, who have not attained the age of 60 years as on
31.01.2019 and the same had been clarified by the Division Bench judgment
of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Bharat Singh & others Vs. Union
of India & Others in W.P.(C).No.13195 of 2019 dated 19.12.2019. For
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.19108 of 2021
better appreciation, the relevant paragraph is extracted hereunder:
“10. It requires to be clarified that the benefit of
paragraph 72 of the judgment of this Court in Dev Sharma
(supra) will be available only to those who had not crossed 60
years of age as on 31st January, 2019. It is further clarified that
the present order will not disturb the benefit already extended in
terms of para 72 of that judgment and in terms of Para 2 (c) of
the order dated 19th August 2019 to any of the Petitioners in the
Dev Sharma batch, who may have crossed the age of 60 years as
on 31st January 2019.”
In view of the above, the petitioner is not entitled to re-fixation of pension
scheme. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of this writ petition.
7. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials
available on record.
8. In view of the order passed by the Division Bench of the Hon'ble
Delhi High Court in the case of Bharat Singh & others Vs. Union of India
& Others, the benefit would be available to all those in CAPF, who had
retired prior to 31.01.2019 provided that they had not crossed the age of 60
years as on 31.01.2019. In the present case on hand, the petitioner proceeded
on superannuation from service at the age of 57 on 31.05.2014 and has
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.19108 of 2021
already attained the age of 60 years on 31.05.2017, much prior to 31.01.2019.
Hence, he is not eligible for any claim for re-fixation of pension and payment
of differential arrears of retirement benefits including pension and gratuity on
the basis of enhanced retirement age of 60 years and the same is applicable
only to personnel who retired at the age of 57 on or after 01.02.2016 and not
prior to the said date.
9. In the result, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.
11.08.2023
vca/vm
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order : Yes/No
To:
1.The Director General of Police CRPF,
C.G.O Complex, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi – 110 003.
2.The Inspector General of Police
Imphal, Manipur – 795 113.
3.The Deputy Inspector General of Police,
GC CRPF,
Langjing, Imphal, Manipur – 795 113.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.19108 of 2021
4.The Deputy Inspector General of Police,
GC CRPF Avadi, Chennai – 600 065.
5.The Commandant,
109 BN CRPF, Mayai Lambi Rd,
Mongshangei, Imphal, Manipur – 795 003.
J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD,J.
vca/vm
W.P.No.19108 of 2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.19108 of 2021
11.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
