Manipur High Court
Moirangthem Nandakishore vs Vrs on 19 September, 2025
Author: Ahanthem Bimol Singh
Bench: Ahanthem Bimol Singh
LAISHRA Digitally signed
by LAISHRAM
M DHAKESHORI
DEVI
DHAKESH Date:
ORI DEVI 2025.09.23
14:15:43 +05'30'
Item No. 27
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
WP(C) No. 301 of 2024
Moirangthem Nandakishore ...Petitioner/s
Vrs.
State of Manipur & 4 ors. ...Respondent/s
-B E F O R E-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH
(Judgment & Order)
(ORAL)
19.09.2025
Heard Ms. Deepika, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner; Mrs. L. Monomala, learned GA appearing for respondent
Nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. S. Jasobanta, learned counsel appearing for
respondent No. 5.
[2] The present writ petition has been filed with a prayer for
quashing and setting aside the order dated 25-01-2024 issued by the
Secretariat: Finance Department (PIC), Government of Manipur,
rejecting the claim of the petitioner for granting the same pensionary
benefits which were given to those pensioners who retired on or after
01-01-1996 and for directing the respondents to provide the
pensionary benefits which were given to the members of the All
WP(C) No. 301 of 2024 Page 1
Manipur Pensioners' Association pursuant to the order dated 12-03-
2021 issued by the Chief Secretary (Finance), Government of Manipur.
[3] The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner took
voluntary retirement from service with effect from 01-09-1993 while
he was serving as UDC in the Veterinary Department, Government of
Manipur. Thereafter, the authorities allowed the petitioner to get
pensionary benefit w.e.f. 01-09-1993 as per the applicable pension
rules.
[4] Consequent upon the introduction of the Manipur Services
(Revised Pay) Rules, 1999, the State Government issued Office
Memorandum dated 21-04-1999 for revision of pensions/ family
pensions of Government servants who retired or died on or before 31-
12-1995 (pre-1996 pensioners/family pensioners) for regulating
payment of their pensionary benefits. The State Government also
issued another Officer memorandum on the same date, i.e. on 21-04-
1999 for regulating pension/Commutation of pension of the
Government servants who retired or died on or after 01-01-1996 (post
1996 pensioners).
[5] The case of the petitioner is that the method of calculation
of commutation of pension of pre-1996 and post-1996 as provided
under the said two office memorandums dated 21-04-1999 was
WP(C) No. 301 of 2024 Page 2
different. Having been aggrieved, some persons who are pre-1996
pensioners challenged the Office Memorandum dated 21-04-1999 for
revision of pensions/family pensions of Government servants of pre-
1996 pensioners and ultimately, the issue was settled by the Hon'ble
Apex Court by passing an order dated 11-07-2019 in Civil Appeal No.
10857 of 2016. By the said judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex
Court, the claim made by the pre-1996 pensioners were allowed and
direction was given that all pensioners, irrespective of their date of
retirement, viz. pre-1996 retirees shall be entitled to revision in
pension at par with those pensioners who retired post-1996 and that
the arrears be paid to the respective pensioners within a period of
three months from the date of passing the said judgment.
[6] The present petitioner approached the authorities for
availing the same benefits which has been granted by the Hon'ble
Apex Court as mentioned herein above by filing a representation dated
05-06-2023 and when the said representation was not attended to
by the concerned authorities of the Government, the petitioner
approached this Court by filing a writ petition registered as WP(C) No.
496 of 2023 seeking for issuing a direction by this Court to the
authorities of the State Government to grant the said relief/benefits as
has been granted by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the above mentioned
WP(C) No. 301 of 2024 Page 3
judgment and the consequential relief which has been granted by the
State Government to those 180 pre-1996 pensioners. The said writ
petition was disposed of by this Court by passing an order dated 07-
07-2023 directing the Deputy Secretary (Finance/PIC), Government of
Manipur to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on
its own merit and in terms of the applicable rules and to dispose of the
same by issuing a speaking order within three months from the date
of receipt of a certified copy of the order.
[7] In purported compliance of the direction given by this
Court, the State Government issued an order dated 25-01-2024
declining to grant the claim made by the petitioner for grant of same
pensionary benefit which has been given to 180 pre-1996 pensioners
in terms of the direction given by the Hon'ble Apex Court in its
judgment dated 11-07-2019 passed in Civil Appeal No. 10857 of 2016,
inter alia, on the ground that the State Cabinet in its decision taken on
11-03-2021 had approved the payment of arrears and pensions only to
the 180 members of the pre-1996 pensioners' association by treating
them equally with the post-1996 pensioners as a measure limited to
the writ petitioners as one time policy and not to be cited as a
precedence in future.
[8] Hence, the present writ petition.
WP(C) No. 301 of 2024 Page 4
[9] It has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner that in the judgment dated 11-07-2019 passed by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 10857 of 2016 filed by the All
Manipur Pensioners' association, the Hon'ble Apex Court directed that
all the pensioners, irrespective of their date of retirement, viz. pre-
1996 retirees shall be entitled to revision in pension at par with those
pensioners who retired post-1996 and that the arrears be paid to the
respective pensioners within a period of three months. The learned
counsel further submitted that as the petitioner is a pre-1996
pensioner and similarly situated with the members of the said All
Manipur Pensioners' Association, the petitioner is entitled to get the
benefits/relief as has been granted by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
aforesaid judgment dated 11-07-2019 and the consequential
benefits given by the State Government under its order dated 12-03-
2021 issued by the Finance Department thereby granting not only the
same pensionary benefits as has been given to the post-1996
pensioners but also the arrears due payable to the members of the
said association. The learned counsel, further submitted that the
present writ petition be allowed by directing the authorities to give to
the petitioner the said pensionary benefits including the arrear pension
due payable to the petitioner in terms of the direction given by the
WP(C) No. 301 of 2024 Page 5
Hon'ble Apex Court as well as by the State Government to the
members of the All Manipur Pensioners' Association.
[10] Mrs. L. Monomala, learned GA appearing for respondent
Nos. 1 to 4 submitted that the impugned order dated 25-01-2024 was
issued by the Finance Department (PIC), Government of Manipur, in
compliance with the order dated 07-07-2023 passed by this Court in
WP(C)No. 496 of 2023 thereby rejecting the representation dated 05-
06-2023 submitted by the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner
is not a member of the All Manipur Pensioners' Association and that
his name was not included in the list of 180 members of the said
association. It has also been submitted by the learned GA that the
petitioner claimed revised pensionary benefits after a gap of 24 years
and such the benefit which was afforded to the 180 members of the
All Manipur Pensioners' Association cannot be extended to the present
petitioner. The learned GA further submitted that the Government
order dated 12-03-2021 was issued as a measure limited to the 180
writ petitioners of the All Manipur Pensioners' Associationonly and as a
one time policy and accordingly, the petitioner is not entitled to make
such claims. The learned GA, accordingly submitted that the present
writ petition be dismissed as devoid of merit.
WP(C) No. 301 of 2024 Page 6
[11] Mr. S. Jasobanta, learned counsel appearing for
respondent No. 5 submitted that the office of the Accountant General
has nothing to do with the relief sought for by the petitioner in the
present writ petition and that it is for the State Government to decide
whether the petitioner is entitled to avail the pensionary benefit which
has been given to the post-1996 pensioners.
[12] I have heard at length the submission advanced by the
learned counsel appearing for the parties and also examined carefully,
the materials available on record. The Hon'ble Apex Court, in its
judgment dated 11-07-2019 passed in Civil Appeal No. 10857 of 2016
filed by the All Manipur Pensioners' Associationcategorically held that
all the pensioners, irrespective of their date of retirement, viz. pre-
1996 retirees shall be entitled to revision in pension at par with those
pensioners who retired post-1996 and directed that arrears be paid to
the respective pensioners within a period of three months from the
date of judgment.
[13] In the present case, there is no dispute with regard to the
fact that the petitioner is a pre-1996 petitioner and that the
Government has not raised any objection or disputed the fact that the
petitioner is similarly situated with the 180 members of the All Manipur
Pensioners' Association, who are all pre-1996 pensioners. The grounds
WP(C) No. 301 of 2024 Page 7
raised by the respondent in rejecting the claim of the petitioner is that
the benefit given by the State government to the 180 members of the
All Manipur Pensioners' Association was pursuant to a State Cabinet
decision taken on 11-03-2021 which approved payment of arrears of
pension by treating them equally with the post-1996 pensioners as a
one-time policy and limited to only those 180 members of the All
Manipur Pensioners' Association, and as such, the petitioner is not
entitled to the same benefits. The another ground given by the State
Government is that the petitioner claimed for payment of the same
pensionary benefits after a gap of 24(twenty four) years.
[14] With regard to the first ground raised by the respondents,
it is to be pointed out that as the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that all
pensioners, irrespective of their date of retirement shall be entitled to
revision in pension at par with those pensioners who retired post -
1996 and as the petitioner is a pre-1996 pensioner and similarly
situated with those 180 members of the All Manipur Pensioners'
Association, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner is
entitled to get the same relief and benefit given to those 180 pre-1996
pensioners as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court and that the ground
raised by the State Government is not sustainable in the eyes of law.
WP(C) No. 301 of 2024 Page 8
[15] With regard to the second ground raised by the
respondents, it is on record that as soon as the Hon'ble Apex Court
passed the judgment on 11-07-2019, the petitioner approached the
authorities for granting the same relief by filing a representation and
thereafter approached this Court by filing a writ petition and as such,
this Court is of the view that the second ground raised by the
respondents that there is delay in claiming the relief is contrary to the
facts available on record and as such, this Court is not inclined to
accept the grounds raised by the authorities.
[16] In view of the findings and reasons given herein above,
this Court is satisfied that the petitioner has been able to make out a
case and accordingly, the impugned order dated 25-01-2024 issued
by the Secretariat, Finance Department (PIC), Government of Manipur
is hereby quashed and set aside. Consequently, the respondents are
directed to give the same pensionary benefit as has been given to the
180 members of the All Manipur Pensioners' Association, vide order
dated 12-03-2021 issued by the Secretariat, Finance Department
(PIC), Government of Manipur as expeditiously as possible, but not
later than three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of
this order.
WP(C) No. 301 of 2024 Page 9
[17] With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition is
disposed of. However, there will be no order as to costs.
JUDGE
Dhakeshori
WP(C) No. 301 of 2024 Page 10
