Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India for the respondents, apart from perusing the record. Since the issue lies in a narrow compass, this Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself. 2. Briefly stated, the petitioner, a Central Government Civil Pensioner, retired on 30.04.1998 from the Central Reserve Police Force. The record reveals that he joined the service on 09.03.1972 and voluntarily retired as Sub-Inspector (Ministerial), thus putting in a total service of 31 years, 1 month and 23 days. Having been granted monthly pension, with periodic revisions in the pay scales, presently the petitioner is drawing a pension of Rs.6341/-.
3. In course of time, the 4th respondent issued proceeding dated 01.09.2008 based on the Government of India Resolution dated 29.08.1998, mandating that the revised pension in no case shall be lower than fifty percent of the minimum of the pay in the pay band plus the Grade Pay corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale with which the pensioner had retired.
4. Based on Exhibit P5 Fitment Table, the minimum pay in the pay band plus grade pay would be Rs.14430/-, 50% of which shall come to Rs.7215/-. Accordingly, the petitioner is said to have made a representation in Exhibit P8 to the respondent authorities, who did not reply.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the very order of the Government of India, based on which the petitioner's pension had been revised, stood quashed by the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 655 of 2010. The record further reveals that when challenge is laid against the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal in W.P. (C) No. 1535 of 2012, a learned Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi dismissed the said writ petition. It appears that the other High Courts as well took the same line and held that the Government of India proceeding dated 01.09.2008 could not be sustained. Eventually, when the matter was taken from the High Court of Delhi to the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it appears that SLA (C) No. 13280 of 2013 and SLP (C) No. 12355 of 2013 were also dismissed by the Supreme Court on 29.07.2013.
6. In fact, a learned Division Bench of this Court through its judgment dated 07.01.2014 in O.P. (CAT) No. 4 of 2014 took the same view as had been taken by the High Court of Delhi and dismissed the challenge laid by the Union of India and certain Central Government Departments.
7. As could be seen from the record in terms of the statement filed on behalf of the first respondent, pending this writ petition, the respondent authorities revised the pension payable to the petitioner and fixed it at Rs.6778/- on pro- rata basis in the pay band of Rs.9300-34800 with Grade Pay of Rs.4200/- (minimum Rs.7215/-).
8. It is further profitable to extract the defence set up by the respondent in their statement, which is as follows:
“9. It is submitted that as per the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Department of Pension & Pensioners' Welfare Office Memorandum No.38/37/08-P&PW(A).pt.1 dated 14.10.2008 and 28.01.2013 a revised concordance table of the pre-2006 pay scale/pay band were prescribed, on the basis of which pension of the pre-2006 pensioners were revised. As per the concordance table prescribed in the OM dated 28.01.2013, for pay scale Rs.5500-9000 of pre-2006 pensioners, the corresponding pay band was fixed as Rs.9300-34800 with Grade pay 4200/- with minimum pension Rs.7215/. According to this OM dated 28.01.2013 the pension of the petitioner has now been revised/re-fixed as Rs.6778/- on pro-rata basis in the pay band 9300-34800 Grade Pay 4200/- (minimum Rs.7215/-) as per office letter No.W023903141100004 dated 03.11.2014 issued from the Office of the 1st respondent.”
9. The fact, however, remains that the petitioner's pensionary benefits are required to be revised and re-fixed with effect from 01.01.2006 duly taking into account Exhibit P5 Fitment Table, as well as the resolution of the fourth respondent dated 29.08.2008 as has been consistently held by the High Court of Delhi and many other courts.
10. In the facts and circumstances, since the very substratum i.e., G.O.I Notification dated 01.09.2008, which formed basis for the revision of the petitioner's pension as had been indicated in letter No.W023903141100004 dated 03.11.2014, stood nullified through authoritative pronouncements, it is imperative on the part of the respondent authorities to revise the pension of the petitioner in terms of Exhibit P5 Fitment Table.
11. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed directing the respondent authorities to revise the pension of the petitioner with effect from 01.01.2006 duly taking into account Exhibit P5 Fitment Table as well as the resolution of the fourth respondent in O.M (F) No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 01.09.2008. Needless to observe, given the fact that the petitioner is being a senior citizen, that the respondent authorities shall complete the entire exercise of revising the pension of the petitioner at the earliest, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
DMR/-
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE