Madhya Pradesh High Court
N.P. Verma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 February, 2016
1 (W.P.Nos. 18535/11(s) & 15658/13)
W.P. No. 18535/2011(s) & W.P.No. 15658/2013
02.02.2016
Shri Rajendra Tiwari, learned Senior Counsel, Shri S.K.
Rao, learned Senior Counsel with Shri D. K. Dixit and Shri
T.K. Khadka, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Shri Pradeep Singh, learned Govt. Advocate for the
respondents/State.
With the consent of the parties both the writ petitions are finally heard.
Petitioner of W.P.No. 18535/2011 (s) is a retired Sports Officer aged 76 years. He was superannuated on reaching the age of superannuation on 31.12.1995. Petitioner No. 1 of W.P.No. 15658/2013 is an association of retired Professors & Principals and petitioner No. 2 is a retired Professor aged 82 years.
For the sake of convenience, the facts are taken from the W.P.No. 18535/2011(s).
By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is seeking directions to the respondents to fix his basic pay at Rs. 14,940/- with effect from 1.1.1996 and to revise his pension accordingly and pay the benefits with effect from 27.7.1998 with interest @ 12% per annum.
Briefly stated, the petitioner was retired from the post of Sports Officer in Senior Grade Pay Scale of Rs. 3700- 5700/- with effect from 31.12.1995. The pay scale of the 2 (W.P.Nos. 18535/11(s) & 15658/13) petitioner was revised to Rs. 12000-420-18300/- with effect from 1.1.1996 under the 5th Pay Commission. The State Government vide order dated 19.1.2010 decided to fix the revised pension of the Sports Officers who have completed 5 years of service on the post as on 1.1.1996 and directed the Higher Education Department to fix the pay of the Sports Officers to Rs. 14,940/- and treat the said basic pay for fixing the pension from 1.1.1996 under the 5h Pay Commission and pay the benefits with effect from 27.7.1998. It is also the case of the petitioner that the Higher Education Department of Government of M.P. vide order dated 16.10.1990 declared the post of Sports Officer as belonging to teaching cadre and brought the same at par with the Assistant Professors and granted them pay scale as recommended by the University Grant Commission with effect from 1.1.1986. The petitioner submits that the Government of India vide order dated 17.12.1998 directed all the Departments to fix 50% of the minimum of the revised pay scale of 5th Pay Commisison to the employees who retired prior to 1.1.1996. In pursuance to the said decision of Government of India, the State Government vide circular dated 16.5.1007 issued a general order directing all the Departments of Government of M.P. to fix 50% of the minimum of the revised pay scales of 5 th Pay Commission to the employees who retired prior to 1.1.1996. The petitioner further submits that the State Government had issued an 3 (W.P.Nos. 18535/11(s) & 15658/13) order dated 19.1.2010 by which it was provided that the Sports Officers who had completed five years of service as on 1.1.1996 at Senior Grade Pay Scale of Rs. 3700-5700/- are entitled to fixation of the pension on basic pay of Rs. 14,940/-. However, the said circular has not been complied and the respondents are denying the benefit on the ground that the petitioner stood retired prior to 1.1.1996.
According to the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, since the petitioner had completed requisite years of service on the post of Sports Officer on the Senior Grade Pay Scale, the petitioner was entitled for fixation of pension on basic pay of Rs. 14,940/- as per circular dated 16.5.2007. The petitioner has also placed reliance on the circular dated 18.12.2009 by which the State Government had further clarified that even those who have retired prior to 1.1.1996 and who had completed five years of service on the relevant post would be entitled for fixation of pension on basic pay of Rs.14,940/-. The grievance of the petitioner is that in-spite of aforesaid various circulars more particularly the circular dated 18.12.2009 the benefits have not been extended in his favour.
Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court vide order dated 25.4.2013 had dismissed this writ petition, however, the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 7.7.2015 passed in Writ Appeal No. 704/2013 had pleased to allow the Writ Appeal and set aside the order of 4 (W.P.Nos. 18535/11(s) & 15658/13) learned Single Judge taking note of the fact that the learned Single Judge had failed to take into consideration the order dated 8.2.2012 passed in W.P.No. 5802/2011 which has been confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No. 1488/2012 and also by the Supreme Court by dismissal of SLP filed therefrom. In support of the contentions, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has placed on record the order dated 8.2.2012 passed in W.P.No. 5802/2011 (Smt. Kamla Jain Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others) as also the order dated 22.1.2016 passed by the Division Bench of this Court at Indore in Writ Appeal No. 353/2015 (Pensioners' Federation, Madhya Pradesh through its President Shri Ambika Prasad Pandey Vs. The Government of Madhya Pradesh and others). He, in the circumstances, submits that the question involved in this petition and also in the connected writ petition has already been considered and decided by this Court and affirmed by the Supreme Court.
On the other hand, respondents have denied the claim of the petitioners and have stated that the petitioner having retired prior to 1.1.1996, he is not entitled for the revision of pay scale which was made with effect from 1.1.1996 under the 5th Pay Commission. It has been argued by Shri Pradeep Singh, learned Govt. Advocate that the petitioners' case is not covered by the order passed by this Court in W.P.No. 5802/2011 (Smt. Kamla Jain Vs. State of M.P. And 5 (W.P.Nos. 18535/11(s) & 15658/13) others), which has been affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court and the Supreme Court as also by the order dated 22.1.2016 passed in W.A.No. 353/2015 ( Pensioners' Federation, Madhya Pradesh through its President Shri Ambika Prasad Pandey Vs. The Government of Madhya Pradesh and others).
Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the averments made in the petition, the return, the rejoinder and the documents filed by the parties as also having gone through the orders passed in the case of Smt. Kamla Jain Vs. State of M.P. and others (supra) and in the case of (Pensioners' Federation, Madhya Pradesh through its President Shri Ambika Prasad Pandey Vs. The Government of Madhya Pradesh and others by the Division Bench of this court (supra), I find that the question involved in both these writ petitions has already been decided by the learned Single Judge as also by the Division Bench of this Court and both the writ petitions deserve to be disposed of on the same terms.
In the circumstances, for the reasons stated in the order passed by the learned Single Judge in the case of Smt. Kamla Jain vs. State of M.P. and others and by the Division Bench at Indore in the case of Pensioners' Federation, Madhya Pradesh through its President Shri Ambika Prasad Pandey Vs. The Government of 6 (W.P.Nos. 18535/11(s) & 15658/13) Madhya Pradesh and others, this petition and the connected writ petition are allowed. The respondents/State is directed to treat the petitioners to be entitled to receive pension as per the recommendation of the 5 th Pay Commission as per their entitlement at par with Professors, Principals, Sports Officer and similarly placed employees who have retired on or after 1.1.1996 and pay them arrears of their enhanced pension with effect from 1.1.1996 to 1.4.2006 along with interest @ of 9% per annum within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The interest shall be payable with effect from the date of revision of pension as contained in the circulars dated 16.5.2007 and 15.1.2008.
With the aforesaid directions, both the writ petitions stand allowed to the extent indicated above.
C.c. as per rules.
(Shantanu Kemkar) Judge AD/