JUDGMENT S. K. Phaujdar, J.
1. Through the present writ petition, the petitioner prayed for a direction for quashing an order Issued by respondent No. 4 fixing his pension at Rs. 288, w.e.f. 1.1.86. A further prayer was made for a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to fix the pension of the petitioner at Rs. 553, w.e.f., the aforesaid date. Prayer was also made for the unpaid arrears calculated at the rate of the pension of Rs. 553 together with interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum for the sum unduly withheld. The matter was heard finally at the admission stage itself as the respondents had appeared and filed counter-affidavit and had contested the claim.
2. It was indicated in the writ petition that the petitioner completed 35 years of continuous service as a teacher and principal in Kunwar Singh Inter College. Ballia, and retired on superannuation on 2.6.70. Under the Triple Benefit Scheme, his monthly pension fixed at Rs. 75 only without any reference to his last drawn salary and this was done in terms of Government Order No. A5355/15-3133/62. dated 17.12.65. It was urged that the Government realised that the pension amount so fixed was too meagre and. as such, the Government went on giving ad hoc and special reliefs w.e.f. 1977 and till December 31. 1985 the ad hoc and other reliefs amounted to Rs. 135 which was to be added with the original pension amount of Rs. 75. The petitioner asserted that the pensioners of the nongovernmental institutions were brought at par with the Government pensioners vide G.O. dated 25.8.90 and this G. O. was based on an earlier G. O. dated 28th July, 1987. The G. O. dated 28th July, 1987, defined the terms 'SAMEKIT PENSION' (consolidated pension). 'VARTMAN PENSION' (existing pension), 'VARTMAN MANHGAI RAHAT (existing dearness relief) and 'ATIRIKT RAHAT (additional relief). These terms had a definite bearing towards calculation of the consolidated pension payable w.e.f. 1.1.1986.
3. It was the case of the petitioner, in short, that his VARTMAN PENSION was to be accounted at the original pension and the reliefs payable upto 31.12.85 and the VARTMAN MAHNGAI RAHAT and ATIRIKT RABAT were to be calculated on the basis of sums covered under the head VARTMAN PENSION. It was the contention of the petitioner that his original pension was Rs. 75 and the total amount of relief payable on 31.12.85 was Rs. 135 and. as such, his VARTMAN PENSION should have been Rs. 210 and together with this sum the VARTMAN MAHNGAI RAHAT was to be calculated at 127.5 per cent of the pension and an additional relief at the rate of 15 per cent, subject to a minimum of Rs. 75 was further to be added, the total additing to Rs. 535 per month. It was asserted that the Government had issued a Ready Reckoner for easy calculation of the rates of pension w.e.f. 1.1.86 and the same also indicated that the persons getting a pension of Rs. 210 on 31.12.85 would be entitled to Rs. 553 per month, w.e.f. 1.1.86. It was contended that the respondents had wrongly calculated the pension amount for the petitioner and fixed it at Rs. 288 only. The State had taken the VARTMAN PENSION at Rs. 75 only, added the dearness relief and the additional relief and fixed the pension for the petitioner at Rs. 288 per month as per Annexure-4 and this was not based on the policy set out by the relevant Government Orders. Accordingly, the prayer for quashing the order fixing the pension amount was made and a mandamus was sought for re-fixing the pension at Rs. 553 per month, w.e.f. 1.1.86.
4. In their counter-affidavit, the respondents also asserted that they had fixed the pension amount in terms of the G.Os. of 1987 and 1990 as relied on by the petitioner. It was, however, asserted that the calculation was rightly made and the petitioner was not entitled to the relief claimed. It was asserted on behalf of the respondents that the claim of the petitioner was not maintainable as the pensioners under the Triple Benefit Scheme would not get the benefit of para 6 (1) of the G. O. dated 28th July, 1987 as the G. O. dated 25.8.90 under para 4 (1) of the G. O. of 1987 only applicable to them.
5. Certain facts are not disputed. The applicant had retired from a non-Government institution and under the Triple Benefit Scheme, his pension was fixed at Rs. 75 and he had been given additional relief to the tune of Rs. 135 per month in addition to the original pension and this position stood on 31.12.1985. The G. O. of 1987 certainly gave certain benefits to Government pensioners. It is only to be seen whether all these benefits were available to non-Government pensioners also in terms of the G. O. of 1990.
6. The G. O. dated 25.8.90 has been reproduced in Annexure-2 to the writ petition. The subject of this notification was simplification/renewal of the pension scheme for the pensioners covered by Triple Benefit Scheme and old pension scheme w.e.f. 1.1.86. It was indicated herein that these pensioners would be entitled to get from 1.1.86 the consolidated pension admissible under para 4 (1) (ka) (1) of the G.O. dated 28th July, 1987. It further stated that these pensioners would also be entitled to the rate of relief that was made admissible for the Government pensioners from time to time as indicated In this notification.
7. The G. O. dated 28th July, 1987 has been reproduced in Annexure-3 to the writ petition. Para 4 (1) (ka) (1) indicated what would be the additional relief admissible to the Government pensioners and stated that those pensioners who had retired prior to 31.3.79 would get 15 per cent of additional relief counted on the VARTMAN PENSION and VARTMAN RAHAT. But the minimum thereof would be Rs. 75. Para 6 of this G. O. gives the procedure for consolidation of pension and such consolidation was to be made by adding three items, (1) VARTMAN PENSION, (2) VARTMAN MAHNGAI RAHAT and (3) the ATIRIKT RAHAT admissible under para 4 and ATIRIKT PENSION admissible under para 5.
8. It was the contention of the petitioner that his consolidated pension should have been counted by totalling his VARTMAN PENSION, the VARTMAN MAHNGAI RAHAT and the ATIRIKAT RAHAT admissible under para 6 of this G. O. It was, however, the contention of the State that the notification of 1987 covered only Government pensiones and the further notification of 1990 did not concede all these benefits to non-Government pensioners as only a consolidated pension in terms of para 4 (1) (ka) (1) was to be made for the non-Government pensioners. The language of this notification is to be gone through very carefully. The subject relates to simplification or renewal of the scheme of pension for the pensioners under the Triple Benefit Scheme. To quote the language of the G. O., "RAJYAPAL MAHODAYA NE UKT PENSIONARON KO VITT VIBHAG KE UKT SHASNADESH D1NANK 28th JULAI, 1987, KE PARA 4 (1) (Ka) (1) MEIN ANUMANYA DAR PAR DINANK 1.1.86 SE SAMEKIT PENSION DENE HETU APNI SAHARSH SWIKRITI PRADAN KAR DI HAI. ISKE ANTARGART RUPYA 500 SE ADHIK PENSION PANE WALE PENSIONARON KO ATIRIKT RAHAT VARTMAN PENSION TATHA VARTMAN RAHAT KE YOG KE BARABAR DHANRASHI DEYA HOGI JO NU1NTAM RUPYA 75 HOCI."
9. It was the stand of the State that this notification does not admit to the pensioners under the Triple Benefit Scheme, the rates indicated in para 6 (1) of the G. O.
10. Even if we go by the present G. O., it is clear from the language that the relief as in para 4 (1) (ka) (1) of the G. O. of 1987 was admissible. This was for the persons drawing pension upto Rs. 500 and the language in the notification of 1990 must be read to cover the pensioners drawing pension less than Rs. 500 which in Hindi should be 'RUPEES 500 SE ANADHIK PENSION PANE WALE'. They should get the VARTMAN PENSION, VARTMAN RAHAT and 15 per cent of the total thereof as additional relief subject to a minimum of Rs. 75 VARTMAN PENSION has been defined in the G. O. dated 28.7.87 and under the definition in para 3 (kha), the VARTMAN PENSION for persons who had retired prior to 1.4.75 would mean the original pension plus the relief given to them from time to time upto 31.12.1985. Thus, a confusion may not be made between present pension and original pension (in Hindi, the VARTMAN PENSION and MOOL PENSION). For the petitioner, the original pension was Rs. 75 and the reliefs given from time to time upto 31.12.1985 amounted to Rs. 135 and this relief was not to be confused with dearness relief as nothing is there on record to show that this relief was in any way connected with the rise in the price index. The VARTMAN PENSION for the petitioner would thus be Rs. 75 plus Rs. 135, totalling Rs. 210. Under the notification of 1990, the applicant was entitled to VARTMAN RAHAT. Undisputedly, this VARTMAN RAHAT or VARTMAN MANHGAI RAHAT was to be given at the rate of 127.5 per cent of the pension. The petitioner, therefore, would be entitled to 127.5 per cent of Rs. 210 as VARTMAN MANHGAI RAHAT. In terms of the G. O. of 1990, the petitioner's additional relief would be calculated on the total sum of the VARTMAN PENSION and VARTMAN RAHAT and as the total did not reach Rs. 500, he would be entitled to the minimum of Rs. 75. The petitioner would thus be entitled to Rs. 210 plus Rs. 268 plus Rs. 75. taking the total to Rs. 553 as his consolidated pension w.e.f. 1.1.86.
11. Apparently, the respondents failed to consider that the persons in the category of the petitioner were given the benefits not only of VARTMAN PENSION and VARTMAW RAHAT but the additional relief as well. The State, however, gave a narrow interpretation of this Government Order of 1990 on the ground that only para 4 (1) (ka) (1) was referred and not para 6 and completely overlooked the concluding lines of the first para which Indicated what were the amounts to be calculated for the consolidated pension. The order fixing the pension of the petitioner at Rs. 288 cannot, therefore, be sustained. The petitioner's pension must be re-fixed w.e.f. 1.1.86 at the rate indicated above.
12. The writ petition stands allowed. The order of the respondents fixing the pension of the petitioner at Rs. 288 per month, w.e.f. 1.1.86 vide Annexure-4 to the writ petition is quashed. The respondents are commanded to fix the consolidated pension of the petitioner at the rate of Rs. 553 per month, w.e.f. 1.1.86 and also to make available to him the further reliefs that had been made admissible by the State Government from time to time as per para 2 of the G. O.
dated 25.8.90 and thereafter. The respondents are also commanded to start paying the pension of the petitioner, subject to any increase by any subsequent G. O., immediately and to pay to him the arrears calculating at the rate as directed above, within three months of production of a copy of this order to the respondents. At present, no direction is being issued for payment of interest on the sum withheld but in case the arrears are not paid within the aforesaid period, interest is to be paid at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date the amounts fell due uptodate.