The Supreme Court has rendered another landmark decision
on the subject of pension in a case titled State
of Rajasthan Vs Mahendra Nath Sharma.
The Court, inter alia, has reiterated the following,
tacitly and directly:
A. Pension is property and not a
bounty based upon the sweet will or grace of the employer. DS Nakara therefore reiterated.
B. Arrears have to flow from date of
inception of anomaly.
C. Employees who are not on rolls on the
date of a subsequent revision of pensionary benefit(s) are also eligible for
future revision of pension.
D. Govt should not perpetrate
litigation.
The parting shot of the Apex Court:
“...It will be
appropriate and apposite on the part of the employers to remember the same and
ingeminate it time and again so that unnecessary litigation do not travel to
the Court and the employers show a definite and correct attitude towards
employees. We are compelled to say so as we find that the intention of the
State Government from paragraph 5 of the circular/memorandum has been litigated
at various stages to deny the benefits to the respondents. It is the duty of
the State Government to avoid unwarranted litigations and not to encourage any
litigation for the sake of litigation. The respondents were entitled to get the
benefit of pension and the High Court has placed reliance on the decision of
another High Court which has already been approved by this Court....”
5 comments:
Thank you Navdeep for the latest rebuttal to our baboogiri of government of India by Supreme Court. Where are the direction of our PM, Law minister and Raksha Mantri not to file cases and stop unnecessary litigation by the government???? It is obvious that all matters regarding welfare of Jawans of Armed Forces are deliberately being allowed to hang..... there is no accountability of the babooos. We have such poor leaders they can not hold their secretaries to perform and be accountable. I pity this type of democracy.
Wouldn't that imply OROP for ALL?
Does it mean that the locus standi of ex-servicemen is wrong as short tenure in service is not the basis for pension re evaluation?
How often would the pension be revised to keep it in sync with the new retirees?
In my opinion this is a hornet's nest.
Decision makers/ implementing authorities should not forget their pious duty "not to encourage litigation for the sake of litigation" and remember that Pension is a statutory right /property and not a bounty based upon the sweet will or grace of the employer. Arrears have to flow from date of inception of anomaly.
At this juncture, it reminded me of the issue where Family Pension to the dependents of re-employed pensioner was granted under EPS'95 only from 27.07.2001 by a DoP&PW Gazette Notification dated 27.07.2001 r.w. Notfn. dated 10.07.2002 thereby caused to denied Family Pension for the period from 16.11.1995 to 26.07.2001. In fact, EPS'95 wef 16.11.1995 is Statutory Scheme enacted by Parliament which is an off shoot of EPF Act,1952. The denial pf Family Pension by an Executive Order is outrightly gross violations of various Hon'ble Courts that such Executive orders cannot take away the Statutory rights accrued under any Statutory Act. It was observed the File notings under RTI Act that the Artificial date i.e. 27.07.2001 was the date of signature of Competent Authority in MoP&PW, GOI and the said date has nothing to do with the right of Family Pension under EPS'95 wef 16.11.1995. Further, denying the Family Pension during the said period under EPS'95 is also gross violation of the Division Bench judgment dated 04.05.2000 of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Rajbala w/o Mai Chand Vs. Union of India & Others (2000-II-CLR-967) r.w. DB judgment of Kerala High Court in case of Union of India Vs. Visalakshy 1998-II-CLR-1166 in which at Para 6, it was considered the Order of Hon'ble President of India who conveyed his sanction to the implantation of the Kerala High Court dated 26.05.1998 regarding Grant of Family Pension to the widow of Army employee for the services rendered by him in the Indian Army notwithstanding any other benefits that may be received by her under the Provisions of the Act of 1952.
It is further pertinent to mention that The Delhi High Court directed that after removal of the anomaly, the pension arrears were to flow from 01 Jan 2006 (i.e. effective date of 6th Central Pay Commission recommendations) and not from the future artificial date of 24 Sep 2012 (i.e.date of GOI’s decision to remove the anomalies in the pension structure after the said Pay Commission). The GOI challenged the decision of the High Court before the Supreme Court. However, the Supreme Court was pleased to dismiss the SLP filed by the Govt in July 2013. The Govt then filed a review petition followed by a curative petition alleging ‘gross miscarriage of justice’ but a 5 Judge Bench dismissed the curative petition too. The Supreme Court in March 2015 has dismissed all appeals (clubbing of SLPs& CAs) filed by the Union of India and upheld the decision of grant of arrears with effect from 01 January 2006 rather than 24 September 2012.
Humble submission that Learned Advocates having concern for the welfare of the Military Personnel who safe guards our nation may take up this issue by PIL for redressal of said Public Grievance of Widows of Defence Personnel for arrears of pension from 16.11.1995 to 26.07.2001 which is their statutory right without any doubt.
While formation of this committee is a welcome step it is still to be seen how sincerely and positively MOD will react to the recommendations of this committee.This is more relevant in view of MOD turning a blind eye to the judgements of AFT and even Supreme Court in many of the cases. Hope it does not turn out to be another JUMLA. Anyway best of luck.
We the pre-2006 pensioners are sincerely grateful to Maj Naqvdeep Singh,crusador and all other ESM Associations who have struggled hard to break the iceberg. We are also sincerely very grateful to GOI who have granted us our dues. Thanking you all once again and with regards.
Post a Comment