Kerala High Court
Abdul Rahiman.E vs The Union Of India on 28 October, 1978
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
SATURDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/15TH SRAVANA, 1938
WP(C).NO. 19332 OF 2012 (N)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
ABDUL RAHIMAN.E.
EX. CONSTABLE DRIVER, KAKKUPARAMBATH HOUSE, KAKKUR
POST, VIA NANMINDA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN
SMT.GEETHA P.MENON
SRI.N.AJITH
SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. THE UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS,
SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI.
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE, C.G.O COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD,
NEW DELHI - 110 031.
3. THE COMMANDANT (NOW DIGP)
GROUP CENTRE, CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE, HYDERABAD -
500 005.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASG OF INDIA
R1-R3 BY ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL
BY SMT.SHALINA, CGC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLYHEARD ON 06-08-2016,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).NO. 19332 OF 2012 (N)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT-P1-TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE ORDER NO. P 111 64/78-AR ISSUED BY THE
COMMANDANT GROUP CENTRE, HYDERABAD DATED 28/10/1978
EXHIBIT-P2-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. W5-52/07 WELFARE ISSUED BY
RESPONDENT NO.2 DATED 08/02/2007
EXHIBITP2(A)-TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT-P2 DATED
DO.,
EXHIBIT-P3-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. P 111-64/1979-PEN-GCH DATED
29/05/2007
EXHIBIT-P4-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. W5-52/-07-WELFARE0-GR SENT BY
RESPONDENT NO.2, DATED NIL-10-2007
EXHIBIT-P4(A)-TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT-P4 DATED
DO.,
EXHIIBT-P5-TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
DATED 11/10/2007
EXHIBIT-P6-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. W 5.52/2007-WELFARE SENT BY
RESPONDENT NO.2 TO RESPONDENT NO.3 DATED 03/12/2007
EXHIBIT-P6(A)-TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT-P6 DATED
DO,.
EXHIBIT-P7-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. W.5.52/08/WELFARRE-GR DATED
02/05/2008
EXHIBIT-P7(A)-TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT-P7, DATED DO.,
EXHIBIT-P8-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. 2.5.52/2010/WELFARE/G.R1 DATED
11/06/2010.
EXHIBIT-P8(A)-TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT-P8 DATED
DO.,
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
EXT.R1(A):TRUE COPY OF INVALIDATION NOTICE, LETTER NO.P.111-64/78- AR DATED
21.10.1978
EXT.R1(B):TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 26.10.1978 SUBMITTED TO THE
COMMANDANT
WP(C).NO. 19332 OF 2012 (N)
EXT.R1(C):TRUE COPY OF GC, CRPF, HYDERABAD OFFICE ORDER NO.P-III-64/78-AR
DATED 28.10.78
EXT.R1(D): TRUE EXTRACT OF RULE 49(2)(B) OF CCS (PENSION) RULES, 1972
EXT.R1(E): TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 04.08.2007 ISSUED TO THE
ADDL.DIGP,GC,CRPF
EXT.R1(F): TRUE EXTRACT OF RULE 18 OF CCS (PENSION) RULES, 1972 AND GOI
DECISION THERE UNDER
EXT:R1(G): TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.CRPF/07/2040/IP-PA-1 DATED 31.08.2007
ISSUED BY PAO, CRPF
EXT R1(H): TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.W.V.52/07-WELFARE (GR) DATED 13.10.2007
ISSUED BY WELFARE DTE., GENERAL, CRPF, NEW DELHI
//TRUE COPY//
P.A TO JUDGE
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
.............................................................
W.P.(C).No.19332 of 2012
.............................................................
Dated this the 6th day of August, 2016
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner joined the Central Reserve Police Force on 15.10.1968 as a Police Constable, and was discharging his duties as a Driver. While so, the petitioner was invalidated from service with effect from 01.11.1978 after completion of 10 years and 17 days in service. Thereafter, the petitioner, after remaining unemployed for a few years, was appointed in KIRTADS, Kozhikode, Kerala, as a Driver with effect from 25.07.1982. Thereafter, on attaining the age of superannuation, he retired from KIRTADS on 30.06.2000. It is not in dispute that on his retirement from KIRTADS, while computing the pensionary benefits due to him, the period of service under the Central Reserve Police Force from 15.10.1968 to 01.11.1978 (FN) was also counted for the purposes of the civil pension and DCRG payable to the petitioner. In the writ petition, it is the case of the petitioner that, notwithstanding the above facts, he is also entitled to claim invalidation pension as per the Central Civil Service (Pension) -2- W.P.(C).No.19332 of 2012 Rules, 1972, by applying the provisions of Rule 49 (2) (b) of the Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules.
2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein the specific case of the respondents is that as per Rule 49 (2) (b) of Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, service pension shall be admissible after completing the qualifying service of 10 years. In the case of the petitioner, it is stated that after deducting the non-qualifying service of 56 days, the qualifying service put in by the petitioner was reckoned as 9 years, 10, months and 9 days. As the qualifying service of the petitioner was less than 10 years, it is stated that he is not entitled for invalidation pension as per the Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1972.
3. I have heard Sri.P.B.Krishnan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Shalina, the learned Central Government Standing counsel for the respondents.
4. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the -3- W.P.(C).No.19332 of 2012 case and the submissions made across the bar, I find that, the case of the petitioner for claiming invalidation pension, over and above the pension that he is since in receipt of pursuant to the counting of Central Reserve Police Force service along with the service rendered by him in KIRTADS, is based on the provisions of Section 42 (2) (b) of the Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1972. It is the case of the petitioner that, as per the provisions of Rule 49 (3) of the Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, in calculating the length of qualifying service, fraction of a year equal to three months and above shall be treated as completed = year and reckoned as qualifying service. Even if the said provision is applied to the case of the petitioner, the petitioner having a qualifying service of 9 years, 10 months and 20 days would only have a total qualifying service of 9 and = years which would still be less than the qualifying service of 10 years that is required for the purposes of grant of invalidation pension. The further contention of the petitioner that if the period of three months but less than 9 months is treated as a completed half year then, the total qualifying service of 10 years would be made up for 20 half early period and going by that logic, the petitioner would qualify for invalidation -4- W.P.(C).No.19332 of 2012 pension cannot be accepted in the face of the express provisions of the rules which mandate that only fractions of the year equal to three months and above will be treated as a completed = year for the purposes of reckoning qualifying service. I am therefore of the view that the prayers sought for in the writ petition cannot be granted and for the said reason, I dismiss the writ petition as devoid of merit.
Sd/-
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns/06.08.16