Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Radha Charan Dixit vs Science And Technology on 4 September, 2025
1 OA No.3471/2023
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
OA No.3471/2023
Order reserved on: 22.08.2025
Order pronounced on: 04.09.2025
Hon'ble Dr. Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A)
Sh. Radha Charan Dixit,
S/o Late Shri Raghubir Singh,
R/o 246, Aravali Apartments, Alaknanda,
New Delhi-110019.
....Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. V.K.Sharma)
Versus
1. Union of India,
M/o Science & Technology,
Through its Director General,
CSIR, Rafi Marg,
Anusandhan Bhawan,
New Delhi-110 001.
2. The Director,
NEERI, (Pension Division),
Nagpur-440 020 (Mah,)
... Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. Malay Swapnil and
Dr. Ch. Shamsuddin Khan)
Digitally signed by Sunita Dutt
Sunita
DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=8895, OID.2.5.4.65=
1f757d2a40f14493a01379dd12b26c68, Phone=
f725f69527d0bd5de6796dc2b9018c93ad3f1f51d1ed68
8256e5ff8c529bbda4, PostalCode=110089, S=Delhi,
SERIALNUMBER=
2bdd79be8aca23c53c876d55428617a4c8cc90ccfe14b
Dutt
22f74ffb78936ff8f7b, CN=Sunita Dutt
Reason: your signing reason here
Location: your signing location here
Date: 2025.09.10 15:55:28+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2023.2.0
2 OA No.3471/2023
ORDER
The present OA has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985 seeking 20% enhanced pension when the applicant entered in the 80th year.
2. Factual Matrix 2.1 The factual matrix of the case is that at the time of his superannuation i.e. on 30.09.2004, the applicant was working as Sr. Scientist under the respondents-CSIR, Department of Science and Technology, Govt. of India. The applicant completed 79th year as on 05.09.2023 and he entered in the 80th year (1st day of 80th year) on 06.09.2023.
2.2 On the same day, the applicant submitted a representation requesting the respondents to grant him stepped-up pension by enhancing existing pension by 20% from the date he entered 79th year of age. This representation was followed by another representation dated 16.10.2023.
The applicant in his representation cited the judgment of Guwahati High Court in W.P.(C) No.45224/2016, titled Virendra Kumar Dutt Gyani vs UOI & ors., which was affirmed by the Supreme Court in Dairy No.18133/2019. As the respondents did not respond to his representations, being Digitally signed by Sunita Dutt Sunita DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=8895, OID.2.5.4.65= 1f757d2a40f14493a01379dd12b26c68, Phone= f725f69527d0bd5de6796dc2b9018c93ad3f1f51d1ed68 8256e5ff8c529bbda4, PostalCode=110089, S=Delhi, SERIALNUMBER= 2bdd79be8aca23c53c876d55428617a4c8cc90ccfe14b Dutt 22f74ffb78936ff8f7b, CN=Sunita Dutt Reason: your signing reason here Location: your signing location here Date: 2025.09.10 15:55:28+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2023.2.0 3 OA No.3471/2023 aggrieved, the applicant has filed the present OA seeking the following relief(s):
"i) Call for the entire record pertaining to the aforesaid case of the applicant.
ii) Direct the Respondents to decide and dispose of the pending representations dated 06.09.23 and 16.10.23 of the applicant forthwith by speaking and reasoned orders in terms of the pronouncement of the Hon'ble Division Bench of the Hon'ble Guwahati High Court in W.P.(C) No.4224/16 titled as "Virendra Dutt Gyani Vs. UOI & 5 Ors.", which was affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP(C) Diary No.18133/19 titled as UOI & Ors. V. Virendra Dutt Gyani".
iii) Direct the Respondents to release the withheld amount towards enhanced amount of pension with interest @18% p.a. w.e.f. 06.09.23 till actual realization.
iv) Award an appropriate cost in favour of the applicant and against the respondents.
v) Any other or further order/s, may kindly be passed in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, in the interest of justice."
3. Notices were issued to the respondents and they have filed their counter reply, to which the applicant has also filed his rejoinder.
4. Submission by learned counsel for the Applicant 4.1 Learned counsel for the applicant submits that CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 which are applicable to CSIR employees stipulates that any applicant who complete its 80th year shall get enhanced pension at 20% of the basic pension. This has been variously interpreted by the administrative authorities. However, this matter got further clarified in a Digitally signed by Sunita Dutt Sunita DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=8895, OID.2.5.4.65= 1f757d2a40f14493a01379dd12b26c68, Phone= f725f69527d0bd5de6796dc2b9018c93ad3f1f51d1ed68 8256e5ff8c529bbda4, PostalCode=110089, S=Delhi, SERIALNUMBER= 2bdd79be8aca23c53c876d55428617a4c8cc90ccfe14b Dutt 22f74ffb78936ff8f7b, CN=Sunita Dutt Reason: your signing reason here Location: your signing location here Date: 2025.09.10 15:55:28+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2023.2.0 4 OA No.3471/2023 judicial pronouncement by Hon'ble High Court of Guwahati in WP(C) No. 4224/2016 decided on 15.03.2018. He refers to para 32 of the said judgment, which is reproduced as under:-
"32. Therefore, on a thorough consideration of the matter, we hold that the benefit of additional quantum of pension as per Section 17B of the Act in the first slab would be available to be a retired judge from the first day of his 80th year. In so far petitioner is concerned, he would be entitled to the said benefit from 30-07-2015 which was the first day of his 80th year. Ordered accordingly"
4.2 Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the judgment reproduced hereinabove of the Guwahati High Court was upheld by the Apex Court in Special Leave Petition No. 18133/2019 decided on 08.07.2019. Hon'ble Guwahati High Court has interpreted that the benefits of additional quantum of pension as per Section 70(b) of High Court Judges (Salary and Condition of Service) Act 1954 (page 19), will be applicable on the first day when the employee enters into the 80th year not on completion of 80th year. He further submits that as the Hon'ble Apex Court upheld the decision of Guwahati High Court, this ratio of the judgment is applicable to similarly placed persons. The case of the present applicant is similarly situated as the case in WP(C) No. 4224/2016.
4.3 Learned counsel for applicant refers to para 25 of the said judgment which is reproduced as under:-
Digitally signed by Sunita DuttSunita DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=8895, OID.2.5.4.65= 1f757d2a40f14493a01379dd12b26c68, Phone= f725f69527d0bd5de6796dc2b9018c93ad3f1f51d1ed68 8256e5ff8c529bbda4, PostalCode=110089, S=Delhi, SERIALNUMBER= 2bdd79be8aca23c53c876d55428617a4c8cc90ccfe14b Dutt 22f74ffb78936ff8f7b, CN=Sunita Dutt Reason: your signing reason here Location: your signing location here Date: 2025.09.10 15:55:28+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2023.2.0 5 OA No.3471/2023 "25. Justice G.P. Singh in his seminal work Principles of Statutory Interpretation dealt with the subject of purposive construction of statutes. According to him, when material words are capable of bearing two or more constructions, the most firmly established rule for construction of such words of all statutes is the rule laid down in Heydon 's case. This rule which is also known as 'purposive construction' or 'mischief rule, requires consideration of four matters while construing an Act -
(i) what was the law before the making of the Act;
(ii) what was the mischief or defect for which the law did not provide;
(iii) what is the remedy that the Act has provided, and
(iv) what is the reason of the remedy.
The rule than directs that the courts must adopt that construction which shall suppress the mischief and advance the remedy.
25.1 In Bengal Immunity Co. -Vs- State of Bihar, AIR 1955 SC 661, Supreme Court succinctly explained the rule holding that it is a sound rule of construction of a statute for the sure and true interpretation of all statutes in general, including beneficial ones. After discerning and considering the four things as noticed above, the court is always to make such construction as shall suppress the mischief and advance the remedy, to suppress subtle inventions and evasions for continuance of the mischief, and to add force and life to the cure and remedy, according to the true intent of the makers of the Act.
25.2. According to Lord Reid, "the word mischief is traditional". He expanded it to include "the facts presumed to be known to Parliament when the Bill which became the Act in question was before it" and "the unsatisfactory state of affairs" disclosed by these facts "which Parliament can properly be supposed to have intended to remedy by the Act".
25.3 As has been observed by the Supreme Court, to interpret a statute in a reasonable manner, the Court must place itself in the chair of a reasonable legislator. So done, the rules of purposive construction have to be resorted to which would require the construction of the Act in such a manner as to see that the object of the Act is fulfilled.
25.4. In selecting different interpretations, Court would adopt that which is just, reasonable and sensible. A construction that results in hardship, serious inconvenience, injustice, absurdity or anomaly or which leads to inconsistency or uncertainty has to be avoided.
Digitally signed by Sunita DuttSunita DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=8895, OID.2.5.4.65= 1f757d2a40f14493a01379dd12b26c68, Phone= f725f69527d0bd5de6796dc2b9018c93ad3f1f51d1ed68 8256e5ff8c529bbda4, PostalCode=110089, S=Delhi, SERIALNUMBER= 2bdd79be8aca23c53c876d55428617a4c8cc90ccfe14b Dutt 22f74ffb78936ff8f7b, CN=Sunita Dutt Reason: your signing reason here Location: your signing location here Date: 2025.09.10 15:55:28+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2023.2.0 6 OA No.3471/2023 25.5. Of course this rule would have no application when the words are susceptible to only one meaning and no alternative construction is reasonably open."
5. Submission by learned counsel for the Respondents 5.1 Per contra, Mr. Malay Swapnil, learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposes the present OA. He refer to OM dated 23.08.2022 issued by the DOP&T (page 17 of reply). In paragraph 2, the DOP&T has clarified regarding granting 20% additional pension for employees who have completed 80th year of age. Para 2 of the said OM stipulates as below:-
"2. In this context, as per the admissible Rules/provisions, "additional pension shall be payable from first day of the calendar month in which it falls due and not from the date of completion of 80 years of age. Therefore, a pensioner born either on 01 08.1942 or on 20.08 1942 shall be eligible for additional pension at the rate of 20% of the basic pension with effect from 301.08 2022."
5.2 According to learned counsel for the respondents, the pensioner is entering into 80th year only on 06.09.2023 and he will be completing 80th year on 05.09.2024. Accordingly, he will be eligible to get additional 20% pension from 01.09.2024 and not from 01.09.2023.
6. Analysis 6.1 The OM dated 23.08.2022 by DO&PT as cited by the learned counsel for the Respondents refers to Rule 18(1) (b) Digitally signed by Sunita Dutt Sunita DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=8895, OID.2.5.4.65= 1f757d2a40f14493a01379dd12b26c68, Phone= f725f69527d0bd5de6796dc2b9018c93ad3f1f51d1ed68 8256e5ff8c529bbda4, PostalCode=110089, S=Delhi, SERIALNUMBER= 2bdd79be8aca23c53c876d55428617a4c8cc90ccfe14b Dutt 22f74ffb78936ff8f7b, CN=Sunita Dutt Reason: your signing reason here Location: your signing location here Date: 2025.09.10 15:55:28+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2023.2.0 7 OA No.3471/2023 All India Services (Death cum Retirement) Rules, 1958. These Rules are not directly applicable to the Scientists working under the Dept. of Science & Technology. However, the DoP&PW vide their OM F.No.38/37/2016-P&PW(A) (i) dated 4th August, 2016 have issued similar clarifications for Central Govt. Employees under Rule 49 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, which is applicable to the Scientists in the Dept. of Science & Technology to which the present applicant belonged. Moreover, Rule 49(2-A) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, contains the following:
"49 (2-A) In addition to pension admissible in accordance with sub-rule (2), after completion of eighty years of age or above, additional pension shall be payable to the retired Government servant in the following manner:-
Age of Pensioner Additional pension From 80 years to less than 85 20% of basic years pension From 85 years to less than 90 30% of basic years pension From 90 years to less than 95 40% of basic years pension From 95 years to less than 50% of basic 100 years pension 100 years or more 100% of basic pension 6.2 The judgment of the Guwahati High Court in Virender Dutt Gyani (supra) cited by the learned counsel for the applicant discusses the provision under Section 17-B of the High Court and Supreme Court Judges (Salaries and Digitally signed by Sunita Dutt Sunita DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=8895, OID.2.5.4.65= 1f757d2a40f14493a01379dd12b26c68, Phone= f725f69527d0bd5de6796dc2b9018c93ad3f1f51d1ed68 8256e5ff8c529bbda4, PostalCode=110089, S=Delhi, SERIALNUMBER= 2bdd79be8aca23c53c876d55428617a4c8cc90ccfe14b Dutt 22f74ffb78936ff8f7b, CN=Sunita Dutt Reason: your signing reason here Location: your signing location here Date: 2025.09.10 15:55:28+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2023.2.0 8 OA No.3471/2023 Conditions) Amendment Act, 2009 wherein exactly the same conditions are incorporated. The same is reproduced here:
"17-B. Additional quantum of pension or family pension- Every retired Judge or after his death, the family, as the case may be, shall be entitled to an additional quantum of pension or family pension in accordance with the following scale:- Age of pensioners or family Additional quantum of pension pensioner or family pension From eighty years to less than Twenty percent of basic eighty five years pension or family pension From eighty five years to less Thirty percent of basic pension than ninety years or family pension From ninety years to less than Forty percent of basic pension ninety five years or family pension From ninety five years to less Fifty percent of basic pension than hundred years or family pension From hundred years or more Hundred percent of basic pension or family pension 6.3 A plain reading of the Section 17-B of the aforementioned Act shows that it is exact reproduction of Rule 49(2A) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 as reproduced above.
6.4 The DoP&PW OM F.No.38/37/2016-P&PW(A) (i) dated 4th August, 2016 has clarified that the enhanced pension is admissible from the beginning of the calendar month in which the retiree enters 80th year. But, it does not say anything about the interpretation of law as held by the Guwahati High Court in Virender Dutt Gyani (supra) case, which was upheld by the Apex Court. The learned counsel for the Digitally signed by Sunita Dutt Sunita DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=8895, OID.2.5.4.65= 1f757d2a40f14493a01379dd12b26c68, Phone= f725f69527d0bd5de6796dc2b9018c93ad3f1f51d1ed68 8256e5ff8c529bbda4, PostalCode=110089, S=Delhi, SERIALNUMBER= 2bdd79be8aca23c53c876d55428617a4c8cc90ccfe14b Dutt 22f74ffb78936ff8f7b, CN=Sunita Dutt Reason: your signing reason here Location: your signing location here Date: 2025.09.10 15:55:28+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2023.2.0 9 OA No.3471/2023 applicant relies on the interpretation of the Guwahati High Court and the Apex Court and states that the same is applicable to the present case under CCS (Pension) Rules, especially Rule 49(2A). As the language under Section 17-B of the High Court and Supreme Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions) Amendment Act, 2009 and Rule 49(2A) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 are exactly the same, this Tribunal also accepts the same interpretation for retirees covered under CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. It would be appropriate to reproduce paragraphs 28 and 32 of the Virender Dutt Gyani (supra) case, which is as follows:
"28. If we look at the first two slabs, we find that the first slab is from 80 years to less than 85 years and the second slab is from 85 years to less than 90 years. The second expression in both the slabs is quite clear : it is either less than 85 years or less than 90 years. Now, if we apply the interpretation given by the respondents to the first expressions, i.e., from 80 years and from 85 years, consequence would be that on completion of 80 years to less than 85 years a retired judge would be entitled to the first scale of additional pension and again on completion of 85 years to less than 90 years, the retired judge would be entitled to the second scale of additional pension. In this process, not only the 80th year would stand excluded, even the 85th and 90th years would be excluded. Likewise, the 95th year as well as the 100th year would also be excluded. This could not be and certainly was not the intention of the law makers. Therefore, by applying purposive interpretation, we have no hesitation in our mind that the interpretation put forward by the respondents is not only unreasonable and irrational leading to an anomalous situation, it would also defeat the very object behind insertion of section 17B in the Act.
xxx xxx xxx
32. Therefore, on a thorough consideration of the matter, we hold that the benefit of additional quantum of pension as per section 17B of the Act in the first slab would be available to be a retired judge from the first day of his 80th year. In so far petitioner is concerned, he would be entitled Digitally signed by Sunita Dutt Sunita DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=8895, OID.2.5.4.65= 1f757d2a40f14493a01379dd12b26c68, Phone= f725f69527d0bd5de6796dc2b9018c93ad3f1f51d1ed68 8256e5ff8c529bbda4, PostalCode=110089, S=Delhi, SERIALNUMBER= 2bdd79be8aca23c53c876d55428617a4c8cc90ccfe14b Dutt 22f74ffb78936ff8f7b, CN=Sunita Dutt Reason: your signing reason here Location: your signing location here Date: 2025.09.10 15:55:28+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2023.2.0 10 OA No.3471/2023 to the said benefit from 30.7.2015 which was the first day of his 80th year. Ordered accordingly."
6.5 In view of the above interpretation, the present applicant who enters 80th year in the month of September 2023 is entitled to enhanced pension @ 20% basic pension w.e.f.
06.09.2023, which is the first day of applicant's 80th year.
7. Conclusion 7.1 In view of the above analysis, the present OA is allowed.
The respondents are directed to grant enhanced pension @20% basic pension as per Rule 49(2A) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 with effect from 06.09.2023, the first day the applicant entered the 80th year of age. This exercise shall be completed within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
7.2 No order as to costs.
(Chhabilendra Roul) Member (A) 'SD' Digitally signed by Sunita Dutt Sunita DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=8895, OID.2.5.4.65= 1f757d2a40f14493a01379dd12b26c68, Phone= f725f69527d0bd5de6796dc2b9018c93ad3f1f51d1ed68 8256e5ff8c529bbda4, PostalCode=110089, S=Delhi, SERIALNUMBER= 2bdd79be8aca23c53c876d55428617a4c8cc90ccfe14b Dutt 22f74ffb78936ff8f7b, CN=Sunita Dutt Reason: your signing reason here Location: your signing location here Date: 2025.09.10 15:55:28+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2023.2.0