Central Administrative Tribunal - Jaipur
Nanag Ram Chopra vs Comptroller And Auditor- General Of ... on 3 January, 2022
1
OA No. 788/2019, OA No. 39/2020, OA No. 100/2020,
OA No. 263/2020 and OA No. 349/2020
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 788/2019,
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 39/2020,
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 100/2020,
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 263/2020,
&
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 349/2020
Order reserved on 22.12.2021
DATE OF ORDER: 03.01.2022
CORAM
HON'BLE MR. DINESH SHARMA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
HON'BLE MRS. HINA P. SHAH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
OA No. 788/2019
1. Nanag Ram Chopra S/o Shri Ram Lal Chopra,
aged about 65 years, Resident of B-8, Bhan
Naga, Queens Road, Jaipur Rajasthan retired
holding post of Senior Audit Officer (Group-A)
from Office of PAG (G&SSA), Rajasthan Jaipur
(Mob. 9460634232)
2. Ashok Kumar Verma S/o Late Shri Banwari Leela
Ram, Age about 62 years, R/o A-293, Krishna
Marg, Malviya Nagar-17 Jaipur, retired holding
post Senior Audit Officer (Group-A) from Office of
AG (E&RSA) Jaipur (Mob. 9828375558)
3. Arun Kumar Jain S/o Late Shri Mahendra Kumar
Jain, Age about 63 years R/o 94/188, Tulsi Marg,
Vijay Path, Mansarovar Jaipur, retired holding
post Senior Audit Officer (Group-A) from Office of
PAG (G&SSA), Jaipur (Mob. 9785010211)
4. Narayan Prashad Sharma S/o Shri Jagannath
Sharma, Age about 66 years, R/o 335-AK
Gopalan Nagar, Khatipura, Jaipur retired holding
post Senior Audit Officer (Group-A) from Office of
PAG (G&SSA), Jaipur (Mob. 9460071363).
5. Lalit Mohan Jaiswal S/o Shri Moti Lal Jaiswal, Age
about 62 year, R/o 64-NEB-Subhash Nagar,
Alwar Rajasthan, retired holding post Senior
2
OA No. 788/2019, OA No. 39/2020, OA No. 100/2020,
OA No. 263/2020 and OA No. 349/2020
Audit Officer (Group-A) from Office of AG
(E&RSA), Jaipur (Mob. 941420389)
6. Hemant Kumar Nagar S/o Shri Bhawani Shankar
Nagar, Age about 63 year, R/o Flat No. S-II,
Vinayak Apartment, 1089 Devi Marg, Rani Sati
Nagar, Jaipur Rajasthan, retired holding post
Senior Audit Officer (Group-A) from Office of PAG
(G&SSA), Jaipur (Mob. 9414848357)
7. Shanti Kumar Maithani S/o Shri P.D. Maithani,
Age about 63 year, R/o 23/80, Swarn Path,
Mansarovar Jaipur Rajasthan, retired holding
post Senior Audit Officer (Group-A) from Office of
PAG (G&SSA), Jaipur (Mob. 9413508594).
....Applicants
Shri Vinod Goyal, counsel for applicants.
VERSUS
1. Union of India through Comptroller & Auditor
General of India, 9 Deel Dayal Upadhyaya Marg,
New Delhi-110124.
2. The Principal Accountant General (General and
Social Sector Audit), Rajasthan, Janpath Near
Statue Circle, AG Office, Jaipur-302005.
3. The Accountant General (E&RSA), Rajasthan,
Janpath Near Statue Circle, AG Office, Jaipur-
302005.
.... Respondents
Shri Anand Sharma, counsel for respondents.
OA No. 39/2020
1. Manohar Lal S/o Shri Kurda Ram, aged about 65
years, Resident of 17-Chhatrasal Nagar, Opp.
Sayed Ki Mori, Near Deepika School, Malviya
Nagar, Jaipur-302017 retired holding post of Sr.
Audit Officer (Group-B) from Office of PAG
(G&SSA), Rajasthan Jaipur (Mob. 9829011768)
2. Neena Kashyap W/o Shri Jag Moohan Kashyap,
aged about 63 years, Resident of C-232-A,
Nirman Nagar, Kings Road, Jaipur-302019 retired
holding post of Assistant Account Officer (Group-
3
OA No. 788/2019, OA No. 39/2020, OA No. 100/2020,
OA No. 263/2020 and OA No. 349/2020
B) from Office of AG (A&E), Rajasthan Jaipur
(Mob. 90412860454)
3. Madhu Mehta S/o Shri Ratan Lal Mehta, aged
about 62 years, Resident of 35 Vrindavan Vihar,
Kings Road, Nirman Nagar, Jaipur-302019 retired
holding post of Senior Accountant (Group-C)
from Office of AG (A&E), Rajasthan Jaipur (Mob.
7976304428).
....Applicants
Shri Vinod Goyal, counsel for applicants.
VERSUS
1. Union of India through Comptroller & Auditor
General of India, 9 Deel Dayal Upadhyaya Marg,
New Delhi-110124.
2. The Principal Accountant General (General and
Social Sector Audit), Rajasthan, Janpath Near
Statue Circle, AG Office, Jaipur-302005.
3. The Accountant General (E&A), Rajasthan,
Janpath Near Statue Circle, AG Office, Jaipur-
302005.
.... Respondents
Shri Anand Sharma, counsel for respondents.
OA No. 100/2020
Hukumi Chand Toondwal S/o Shri Hari Ram, age
about 66 years, R/o E-123, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur-
302021 retired holding post of Supervisor (Group-B)
from Office of PAG (G&SSA), Rajasthan Jaipur (Mob.
946553221).
....Applicant
Shri Vinod Goyal, counsel for applicant.
VERSUS
1. Union of India through Comptroller & Auditor
General of India, 9 Deel Dayal Upadhyaya Marg,
New Delhi-110124.
4
OA No. 788/2019, OA No. 39/2020, OA No. 100/2020,
OA No. 263/2020 and OA No. 349/2020
2. The Principal Accountant General (General and
Social Sector Audit), Rajasthan, Janpath Near
Statue Circle, AG Office, Jaipur-302005.
.... Respondents
Shri Anand Sharma, counsel for respondents.
OA No. 263/2020
Ranjit Singh Mangawa S/o Shri Shiv Ram Singh, age
about 63 years, R/o Village & Post Godawas, Tehsil
Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar, Rajasthan (332713)
retired holding post of Senior Audit Officer (Group-B)
from Office of PAG (G&SSA), Rajasthan, Jaipur (Mob.
9875114441).
....Applicant
Shri Vinod Goyal, counsel for applicant.
VERSUS
1. Union of India through Comptroller & Auditor
General of India, 9 Deel Dayal Upadhyaya Marg,
New Delhi-110124.
2. The Principal Accountant General (General and
Social Sector Audit), Rajasthan, Janpath, Near
Statue Circle, AG Office, Jaipur-302005.
.... Respondents
Shri Anand Sharma, counsel for respondents.
OA No. 349/2020
Nanu Ram Mehgwal S/o Shri Dhunkal Ram Meghwal
age about 64 years, R/o C-127, Karni Nagar, Lalgarh,
Basant Bhihar Bikaner (334001) retired holding post
of Senior Audit Officer (Group-B) from Office of PAG
(G&SSA), Rajasthan Jaipur (Mob. 9414501218).
....Applicant
Shri Vinod Goyal, counsel for applicant.
5
OA No. 788/2019, OA No. 39/2020, OA No. 100/2020,
OA No. 263/2020 and OA No. 349/2020
VERSUS
1. Union of India through Comptroller & Auditor
General of India, 9 Deel Dayal Upadhyaya Marg,
New Delhi-110124.
2. The Principal Accountant General (General and
Social Sector Audit), Rajasthan, Janpath Near
Statue Circle, AG Office, Jaipur-302005.
.... Respondents
Shri Anand Sharma, counsel for respondents.
ORDER
Per: Hina P. Shah, Judicial Member With the consent of learned counsels for the parties, OA No. 788/2019, OA No. 39/2020, OA No. 100/2020, OA No. 263/2020 and OA No. 349/2020 are taken up together for disposal as common question of law and facts is involved in the aforesaid cases.
2. For the sake of convenience, the brief facts of OA No. 788/2019 are taken up. The OA No. 788/2019 has been filed by the applicants under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 for the following reliefs:-
"(i) By an Appropriate order or direction, the Respondent be directed to extend / accord the benefits of one annual grade increment (AGI) as the applicants have completed one 6 OA No. 788/2019, OA No. 39/2020, OA No. 100/2020, OA No. 263/2020 and OA No. 349/2020 year service since last AGI was sanctioned on the date of retirement i.e. 30 June, with all consequential benefits including revision of the last pay drawn. The retiral / pensionary benefits be ordered to be revised accordingly and arrears thereof be paid to the applicants with 9% interest from the date of retirement.
(ii) By an appropriate order or directions the impugned communication / letter dated 27-
05-2019, letter dated 02-11-2018, letter dated 26-11-2019, letter dated 26-08-2019, letter dated 05-08-2019, letter dated 03- 10-2019 and 16-05-2019 (Annexure A/1 Colly.) respectively may kindly be quashed and set aside.
(iii) Any other order which appears to be just and correct in the interest of justice may also be passed."
3. (a) The brief facts of the case (OA No. 788/2019), as stated by the applicants, are that all the applicants have retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30th June of their respective year of retirement. The applicants stated that as per Rule 10 of Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008, the date of next increment in the revised pay structure is as under: -
"10. Date of next increment in the revised pay structure - There will be a uniform date of annual increment, viz. 1st July of every year. Employees completing 6th Months and above in the revised pay structure as on 1st of July will be eligible to be granted the increment. The first increment after fixation of pay on 1.1.2006 in the revised pay structure will be granted on 1.7.2006 7 OA No. 788/2019, OA No. 39/2020, OA No. 100/2020, OA No. 263/2020 and OA No. 349/2020 for those employees for whom the date of next increment was between 1st July, 2006 to 1st January, 2007."
(b) All the applicants have completed their one year service between 1st July to 30th June of their respective year of their retirement but since the annual grade increment fell due on 1st July, on which they were not in service due to retirement from service on 30th June, the respondents have not allowed the benefit of one annual grade increment to them for the purpose of calculating their retirement / pensionary benefits and paid retirement / pensionary benefits to them by treating the pay fixed on 1st July of the previous year of their retirements as last pay drawn.
(c) The applicants stated that the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in the case of P. Ayyamperumal vs. The Registrar, C.A.T., Madras Bench & Ors., (WP No. 15732 of 2017), decided on 15th September, 2017, has considered the similar controversy regarding grant of one notional annual grade increment which fell due on 1st July for the period (1st July to 30th June) but not allowed due to not in service on 1st July due to retirement on 30th 8 OA No. 788/2019, OA No. 39/2020, OA No. 100/2020, OA No. 263/2020 and OA No. 349/2020 June. The Hon'ble High Court in the aforesaid case in para 7 has held as under: -
"7. The petitioner herein had completed one full year service as on 30.06.2013, but the increment fell due on 01.07.2013, on which date he was not in service. In view of the above judgment of this Court, naturally he has to be treated as having completed one full year of service, though the date of increment falls on the next day of his retirement. Applying the said judgment to the present case, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order passed by the first respondent- Tribunal dated 21.03.2017 is quashed. The petitioner shall be given one notional increment for the period from 01.07.2012 to 30.06.2013, as he has completed one full year of service, though his increment fell on 01.07.2013, for the purpose of pensionary benefits and not for any other purpose. No costs."
(d) The applicants stated that against the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras dated 15.09.2017, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 22283/2018 has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 23.07.2018 and further Review Petition (C) No. 1731/2019 has also been dismissed vide order dated 08.08.2019 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Therefore, the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras has attained finality. The applicant further stated that in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras, coordinate Bench of this Tribunal at Ernakulam in OA No. 180/1055/2018 (K. 9 OA No. 788/2019, OA No. 39/2020, OA No. 100/2020, OA No. 263/2020 and OA No. 349/2020 Shreedharan vs. Union of India & Ors.) decided on 03.12.2019 has directed the respondents to grant one notional increment to the applicant for the purpose of calculating the pensionary benefits and not for any other purpose. The applicants stated that the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Gopal Singh vs. Union of India & Ors. [WP (C) No. 10509/2019) vide its order dated 23.01.2020 has also considered the similar controversy.
(e) The applicants stated that being aggrieved by the impugned action of the respondents whereby they are not granting one notional annual grade increment to them due to their retirement on 30th June for the purpose of calculating the retirement benefits, they have filed their representations, which have been rejected vide impugned orders / letters dated 27.05.2019, 02.11.2018, 26.11.2019, 26.08.2019, 05.08.2019, 03.10.2019, 16.05.2019 (Annexure A/1 Colly). Therefore, the present Original Application has been filed by them for redressal of their grievances.
4. (a) After issue of notices, the respondents have filed their reply stating that the employees completing 6 months and above in the revised pay structure as on 10 OA No. 788/2019, OA No. 39/2020, OA No. 100/2020, OA No. 263/2020 and OA No. 349/2020 1st July will be eligible to be granted the increment. The respondents did not find any justification in the case of applicants with regard to allow one annual increment due on 1st July of their retirement as the applicants have retired from service on 30th June and they were not in service on 1st July of the respective year. As per FR 17 (1), an officer is entitled to draw the pay and allowances with effect from the date on which he assumes the duty of that post and shall cease to draw them as soon as he ceases to discharge the duty of that post. As per FR 56 (a), every Government servant shall retire on the afternoon of the last day of the month in which he attains the age of 60 years and in case wherein the date of birth of the Government servant is the first of the month, he shall retire from the service on the afternoon of the last date of the preceding month on attaining the age of 60 years. As per Rule 10 of the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008, annual increment accrues on 1st July of every year. As per this Rule, employees completing 6 months and above service in the revised pay structure as on 1st July will become eligible for one increment. The applicants' retirement benefits were worked out and paid on the basis of the last pay drawn on 30th 11 OA No. 788/2019, OA No. 39/2020, OA No. 100/2020, OA No. 263/2020 and OA No. 349/2020 June in terms of Rules. The applicants can only be treated as retired Government servant and not a Government servant on 1st July. The applicants have sought notional increment and consequential pension benefits on the basis of the order dated 15.09.2017 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the matter of P. Ayyamperumal. So far as the matter of P. Ayyamperumal is concerned, it is stated that the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in P. Ayyamperumal is in personam.
(b) The respondents stated that subsequent to the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Madras in P. Ayyamperumal case, Madras Bench of this Tribunal vide its orders dated 19.03.2019 in OA No. 310/309/2019 and OA No. 310/312/2019 and order dated 27.03.2019 in OA No. 310/26/2019 has also dismissed the similar requests related with notional increment for pensionary benefits. Therefore, the present Original Application deserves to be dismissed.
5. Heard learned counsels for the parties and examined the material available on record including the judgments / orders cited by the parties. 12 OA No. 788/2019, OA No. 39/2020, OA No. 100/2020, OA No. 263/2020 and OA No. 349/2020
6. The applicants besides reiterating their submissions made earlier, further stated that the controversy involved in the present case has been sorted out by the several judgments of the Hon'ble High Courts and Hon'ble Apex Court and this Tribunal. The applicants stated that the present matter is covered by an identical matter decided by this Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Ram Karan Bhakar & Ors. vs. The Ministry of HRD Department & Ors. (OA No. 291/451/2020), decided on 29.09.2021. He has also relied upon order dated 15th July, 2021 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in the case of Society for Teachers' Cause through its General Secretary & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (OA No. 776/2019) and other connected matters. It is the claim of the applicants that similar reliefs be granted to the present applicants as has been granted in the aforesaid cases by this Tribunal.
7. The respondents besides reiterating their submissions made earlier, vehemently argued that the applicants are not entitled for any relief to be granted as they can only be treated as a retired Government servant on 30th June and not a Government servant 13 OA No. 788/2019, OA No. 39/2020, OA No. 100/2020, OA No. 263/2020 and OA No. 349/2020 retired on 1st July. They further stated that a person who retires on the last working day would not be entitled for any increment falling due on the next day and payable next day thereafter. Therefore, the respondents prayed that their action is proper and the Original Application filed by the applicants deserves to be dismissed.
8. The factual matrix of the case is that all the applicants have retired on 30th June. Though the years of superannuation of some of the applicants are different but common thing amongst these applicants is that they have retired on 30th June. The applicants are seeking relief for grant of one notional annual grade increment to each of the applicants due on the 1st July of their respective year of retirement from service for the purpose of calculating their retirement / pensionary benefits, denied due to retirement on 30th June and accordingly revised the retirement / pensionary benefits of the applicant and grant all consequential benefits including arrears of pensionary benefits and pension be granted to the applicant. It is the claim of the applicants that they have rendered one full year of service on 30th June i.e. the date of 14 OA No. 788/2019, OA No. 39/2020, OA No. 100/2020, OA No. 263/2020 and OA No. 349/2020 their retirement and as such they are entitled for grant of one notional annual increment.
9. The issue in question has been dealt by several Benches of this Tribunal as well as several Hon'ble High Courts and they have taken a view that the increment becomes payable on account of the satisfactory service rendered by the employee for the preceding six months, and mere fact that he retired one day earlier, should not be a ground to deny him the said benefit.
10. This Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Ram Karan Bhakar (supra) and Principal Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Society for Teachers' Cause (supra), as relied by the applicants, have already decided the similar issue and, therefore, we are in respectful agreement with the view taken by this Tribunal in the aforesaid cases.
11. Be that as it may, once the various Benches of this Tribunal, the Hon'ble High Courts and the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the increment, which became due on 1st July as the case may be, needs to be released for the employees, who retired one day 15 OA No. 788/2019, OA No. 39/2020, OA No. 100/2020, OA No. 263/2020 and OA No. 349/2020 earlier thereto, the applicants herein cannot be denied such benefits.
12. Consequently, all the impugned orders/letters in the respective Original Applications are hereby quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to grant one annual grade increment payable on 1st July to all the applicants for the period from 1st July to 30th June for the respective years in which they have retired and to re-fix their pension accordingly, if the applicants are found otherwise eligible for grant of such annual grade increment, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The respondents are also directed to pay arrears to the applicants within a period of one month thereafter.
13. With the above observations and directions, all the Original Applications are disposed of. No order as to costs.
(HINA P. SHAH) (DINESH SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER /nlk/