1987 (8) TMI 446 - SC - Indian Laws

Government order on pension eligibility applied to all pensioners, regardless of retirement date.

R.L. MARWAHA Versus U.O.I.

The court held that the government order allowing the counting of Central Government service towards pension in an autonomous body should apply to all ... - Issues Involved:1. Entitlement to count previous Central Government service for pension in an autonomous body.2. Validity of the condition making the government order applicable only to employees retiring after its issuance.3. Classification of pensioners based on the date of retirement under Article 14 of the Constitution.Detailed Analysis:1. Entitlement to Count Previous Central Government Service for Pension in an Autonomous Body:The primary issue was whether an employee of an autonomous body established under the Central Government could claim the benefit of the period of service rendered in a pensionable post under the Central Government for computing qualifying service for pension. The petitioner, who worked as an Upper Division Clerk in the Central Government from 1950 to 1953, joined the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) in 1953. The petitioner retired from ICAR in 1980 and was granted pensionary benefits based on his service from 1953 to 1980. He requested that his prior service from 1950 to 1953 be counted towards his pension, which was initially denied due to existing policies.2. Validity of the Condition Making the Government Order Applicable Only to Employees Retiring After Its Issuance:The government issued an order on August 29, 1984, allowing the counting of service rendered under the Central Government towards pension in an autonomous body. However, Paragraph 7 of the order stated that it would be applicable only to employees who retired after the date of the order. The petitioner challenged this condition, arguing that it created an unjust classification of pensioners based on their retirement date, which was not warranted under Article 14 of the Constitution.3. Classification of Pensioners Based on the Date of Retirement Under Article 14 of the Constitution:The petitioner contended that the classification of pensioners into two classes-those who retired before and after the government order-was unconstitutional as it lacked a nexus to the objective of the order. The respondents argued that the petitioner was not entitled to the benefit as he retired before the order's issuance and joined ICAR as a fresh entrant. The court found that the classification was unjustified and discriminatory. The court held that the government order should apply to all pensioners who rendered service under the Central Government or an autonomous body, irrespective of their retirement date, as long as they were alive on August 29, 1984.Conclusion:The court directed the respondents to revise the petitioner's pension by including his service under the Central Government for computing qualifying service. The petitioner was entitled to the difference in pension from August 29, 1984, the date of the government order, but not for the period before. The writ petition was allowed, and no costs were imposed.