Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Union Of India vs Paras Ram on 28 August, 2024
Author: Hima Kohli
Bench: Hima Kohli
CA NOS. 12353-12354 OF 2016
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEALS NO. 12353-12354 OF 2016
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. APPELLANTS
VERSUS
PARAS RAM RESPONDENT
ORDER
1. Learned counsel for the respondent in all fairness informs the Court that the issue raised in the present appeals has been decided by a 3-Judges Bench vide Judgment dated 08th November, 2019 rendered in Civil Appeal No.8497 of 2019 etc. titled “Union of India & Ors. vs. Gandiba Behera” wherein, the question that arose for consideration was as to whether services rendered by the employees in the postal department in the capacity of Gramin Dak Sevaks (GDS) ought to be computed or not for the purpose of calculation of the qualifying service of their pension after they got selected in regular posts in the said department.
2. Relying on an earlier decision of this Court dated 24 th November, 2015 in Civil Appeals No.13675-13676 of 2015 titled “Union of India & Ors. vs. The Registrar & Anr.”, this Court held in Gandiba Behera (supra) thus :
“19. Having regard to the provisions of the aforesaid Rules relating to qualifying service requirement, in our opinion the services rendered by the respondents as GDS or other Extra-Departmental Agents cannot be factored in for computing their Signature Not Verified qualifying services in regular posts under the postal department on the question of Digitally signed by geeta ahuja grant of pension. But we also find many of the respondents are missing pension on Date: 2024.09.02 10:08:36 IST account of marginal shortfall in their regular service tenure. This should deserve sympathetic consideration for grant of pension. But we cannot trace our power or Reason:
jurisdiction to any legal principle which could permit us to fill up the shortfall by importing into their service tenure, the period of work they rendered as GDS or its 1 CA NOS. 12353-12354 OF 2016 variants. At the same time, we also find that in the case of Union of India & Ors. v. The Registrar & Anr. (supra), though the incumbent therein (being respondent no.2) had completed nine years and two months of service, the Union of India had passed orders granting him regular pension. This Court in the order passed on 24th November 2015 had protected his pension though the appeal of Union of India was allowed.
20. For the reasons we have already discussed, we are of the opinion that the judgments under appeal cannot be sustained. There is no provision under the law on the basis of which any period of the service rendered by the respondents in the capacity of GDS could be added to their regular tenure in the postal department for the purpose of fulfilling the period of qualifying service on the question of grant of pension.”
3. In view of the fact that the aforesaid case applies to the facts of the instant case on all fours, the impugned judgment dated 04 th November, 2015 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla cannot be sustained. The same is accordingly quashed and set aside and the present appeals are allowed. It is held that the respondent would not be entitled to claim any pension on superannuation in view of the fact that his service in the post of regular Group D employee falls short of 10 years.
4. We place on record our appreciation for the assistance rendered by Mr. James P. Thomas, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, who has been candid enough to bring to the notice of this Court a judgment that goes against the respondent in the spirit of correctly assisting the Court.
……………………….......................J. ( HIMA KOHLI ) ……………………….......................J. ( SANDEEP MEHTA) NEW DELHI 28th AUGUST, 2024 GA 2 CA NOS. 12353-12354 OF 2016 ITEM NO.109 COURT NO.9 SECTION XIV-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 12353-12354/2016 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS PARAS RAM RESPONDENT(S) Date : 28-08-2024 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA For Appellant(s) Mr. Vinayak Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Anmol Chandan, Adv.
Mr. Alabhya Dhamija, Adv.
Mr. Amit Sharma (b), Adv.
Mr. Harish Pandey, Adv.
Mr. Sachin Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Aaditya Dixit, Adv.
Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. James P. Thomas, AOR Mr. B K Berera, Adv.
Mr. K K Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Ravi Sagar, Adv.
Mr. Babu Malayil, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the court made the following O R D E R The appeals are allowed in terms of the signed order. Pending application(s), if any, are disposed of.
(Nand Kishor) (Geeta Ahuja)
Court Master (NSH) Assistant Registrar-cum-PS
(Signed Order is placed on the file)
3