Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Sh.Iqbal Singh Vedi vs Union Of India on 18 December, 2014
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH O.A.NO. 1075 OF 2014 New Delhi, this the 18th day of December, 2014 CORAM: HONBLE SHRI RAJ VIR SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER .. Sh.Iqbal Singh Vedi, Son of late Sh.Attar Singh Vedi, Ex-Sr.Technical Officer, (N.A.A.Division), Airport Authority of India, Safdarjung Airport, New Delhi, R/o III/M-5, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi 110024 . Applicant (By Advocate: Shri Malaya Chand) Vs. Union of India Through 1. Director General of Civil Aviation, Technical Centre, Safdarjung Airport, New Delhi 110003 2. Senior Accounts Officer, Pay & Accounts Office, DGCA, Ministry of Civil Aviation, Safdarjung Airport, New Delhi 110003 .. Respondents (By Advocate: Shri H.K.Gangwani) . ORDER Raj Vir Sharma, Member(J):
In this Original Application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:
8.1 That this Honble Tribunal may be graciously pleased to allow this Application and direct the Respondents to Quash the wrongly revised PPO issued by PAO, Safdarjung Airport, New Delhi dated 11.11.2013 and Subsequent PPO dated 05.12.2013 issued by CPAO R.K.Puram,New Delhi and direct the Department/Respondent to act upon the direction of the Honble CATs order by immediately issuing a revised PPO with Applicants basic Pension fixed as Rs.2575/- per month, with effect from November 1990 thereby further revising Applicants Pension w.e.f. 01.01.1996 as Rs.7,150/- in Scale 24 and further revising Applicants Pension as Rs.23050/- in Scale 24 w.e.f. 01.01.2006 (already receiving from 01.01.2006 onwards till the time impugned PPO came) as per his entitlement stated above in the Application and continue revising as per pay scales being revised from time to time by the Government of India.
8.2 Direct PNB Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi 110024 (Pension Disbursing Bank) not to recover any dues as stated in their letter and continue disbursing the Applicant the same pension in Scale 24 since 01.01.2006 as prayed above and withdraw their letter dt.26.02.2014.
8.3 Pass appropriate orders for damages against the wrong doers/respondents being SAO of PAO, of DGCA, Safdarjung Airport for committing wrongful, illegal, unjust, unfair, arbitrary Acts qua the Applicant who is senior citizen having age of more than 81 years of age suffering from several ailments.
8.4 Pass an order against the respondent not to harass the Applicant who is more than 81 years old with lots of ailments and already fighting with the Department and the Respondents for rightful claim of my pension for the last 18 years and this amounts to criminal intimidation and harassment to Applicant which he cannot withstand any further.
8.5 Any other or further relief/order which this Honble Court deem fit and proper may also be passed in favour of the Applicant herein and against the respondents.
2. Brief facts of the applicants case, as projected in the O.A., are as follows:
2.1 The applicant was working as a Senior Technical Officer in the pay scale of Rs.3000-4500/- in the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA). On conversion of the DGCA into an autonomous body, namely, National Airports Authority (NAA), the applicant was transferred to the NAA on 2.10.1989. He exercised option on 15.1.1990 (Annexure 2 collectively) to be governed by the pensionary benefits available under the Government at the time of his retirement in accordance with the Central Government Rules in force at that time. He retired from service on 30.11.1990. DGCA fixed his pension at Rs.1658/- per month w.e.f. November 1990, in accordance with the Department of Pension & Pensioners Welfare Department, O.M. dated 13.1.1986 and the DGCAs letter dated 10.9.1990 (Annexure 2 collectively).
2.2 On 18.6.1996 NAA revised the applicants emoluments in the new IDA pay scale of Rs.3700-140-4450-150-5300/- during the period of his working from 2.10.1989 till 30.11.1990 when he retired from service. Despite repeated requests, the pension of the applicant was not revised on the basis of his revised emoluments on the date of his retirement. Therefore, he and two other similarly placed persons had filed OA No.1640 of 2006. The Tribunal, vide order dated 4.6.2007(Annexure 3), allowed the said O.A. and directed the respondent-DGCA to revise/re-fix his pension strictly in accordance with the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and as per the 5th CPC recommendation.
2.3 The respondent-Department challenged the Tribunals order by filing C.W.P.No. 5687 of 2007 before the Honble High Court of Delhi. The Honble Court, vide orders dated 13.12.2007 and 11.7.2013 (Annexure 4), directed the respondent-Department to implement the order passed by the Tribunal, subject to the applicant and others filing undertakings before the Honble Court that in case the writ petition eventually succeeds and the amounts received by him are found to be in excess of their legitimate dues, the excess shall be recoverable from their pension. In compliance with the Tribunals order and the Honble High Courts direction, the PAO,CPAO, issued pension revision letter dated 20.3.2008 (Annexure 5) revising his basic pension to Rs.6597/- with effect from 1.1.1996..
2.4 According to the applicant, at the time of retirement, his pension was to be fixed by taking into account the last pay drawn by him and not on average of last ten months emoluments. As his last pay was Rs.5150/- per month, his basic pension should have been fixed at Rs.2575/- and not Rs.2508/- with effect from November 1990. In this connection, the applicant has referred to the Government of India O.M. No.4/14/2001/P&PW (D), dated 19.9.2003 (Annexure 6). The applicant has also cited the case of one Shri Gianchandani, who, according to him, was junior to the applicant and was in receipt of pay scale of Rs.3700-5000 before 1.1.1996. The said Shri Gianchandani retired from a Department of the Government of India and his pension was revised w.e.f. 1.1.1996 in Scale 24(Annexure 7). The applicant claimed that his pension should have been revised in Scale 24 w.e.f. 1.1.1996 as he was similarly placed as Shri Gianchandania.
2.5 It is the claim of the applicant that his pension should have been revised to Rs.2575/- w.e.f. 1.12.1990, Rs.7150/- w.e.f. 1.1.1996, Rs.23050/- w.e.f 1.1.2006, and Rs.27660/- with effect from 1.11.2012 on his reaching the age of 80 years, and consequential family pension should have been revised on the basis of the same.
2.6 The applicant submitted an application dated 12.2.2009 (Annexure 8) requesting the Punjab National Bank, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi, i.e., the Pension Disbursing Authority, to revise his pension as indicated in the said letter. Accordingly, the said Bank revised his pension at Rs.23,050/- w.e.f. 1.1.2006, which he has been receiving.
2.7 On 18.11.2013 the applicant received copy of a letter No.2151-52 dated 11.11.2013 from the Pay & Accounts Officer, DGCA, reducing his basic pension from Rs.23050/- to Rs.11,600/- w.e.f. 1.1.2006. The said letter dated 11.11.2013 was addressed by the PAO, DGCA,New Delhi, to the P.A.O.,CPAO, New Delhi, with copies thereof endorsed to the aforesaid Bank and to him. The applicant immediately wrote a letter dated 19.11.2013 (Annexure 9) to the PAO, DGCA. On the basis of the said letter dated 11.11.2013, the P.A.O., CPAO, issued letter dated 5.12.2012 revising his basic pension at Rs.11,100/- with effect from 1.1.2006.
2.8 On receipt of the P.A.O., CPAOs letter dated 5.12.2013, the Punjab National Bank, vide letter dated 26.2.2014 (Annexure 10), asked the applicant to refund Rs.15,00,000/- allegedly paid to him as excess pension with effect from 1.1.2006.
2.9 It is contended by the applicant that he has not been paid pension due to him right from 1.12.1990, i.e., the date following the date of his retirement till 1.1.2006 with effect from which he has been paid revised pension of Rs.23,050/- to which he is entitled. It is also contended by the applicant that reduction of his pension from Rs.23,050/- to Rs.11,100/- being in total violation of Rule 70 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, is unsustainable in the eye of law. Consequently, the alleged recovery of Rs.15,00,000/- sought to be made from him by the Punjab National Bank, is illegal.
3. Opposing the O.A., the respondents have filed a counter reply wherein it is, inter alia, stated as follows:
3.1 The basic pension of the applicant was revised to Rs.2508/- w.e.f. 1.12.1990 correctly on the basis of average emoluments of last ten months drawn by him at the time of his retirement from the autonomous body in accordance with Rule 49 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 as applicable at that time.
3.2 The IDA pay scales were introduced in the Airports Authority of India(AAI) (erstwhile National Airports Authority) with effect from 1.1.1989, vide AAIs letter dated 18.6.1996. The applicant was granted IDA pay scale of Rs.3700-140-4400-150-5300/- which was first brought to the equivalent CDA pay scale Rs.3000-100-3500-125-4500/-, and his basic pension was revised to Rs.6597/- with effect from 1.1.1996 as per the 5th CPC pay scale of Rs.10000-15200/-. Taking into account the 6th CPC Pay Band 3 (Rs.15600-39100) with Grade Pay of Rs.6600/-, his basic pension was further revised to Rs.11100/- with effect from 1.1.2006, vide PAO,CPAOs letter dated 5.12.2013. The DP&PW, vide OM dated 11.2.2009, clarified that the fixation of pension would be subject to the provision that the revised pension, in no case, shall be lower than fifty percent of the minimum of the pay in the Pay Band plus the Grade Pay corresponding to the pre-revised Pay Scale from which the petitioner had retired. The benefit of upgradation of posts subsequent to their retirement would not be admissible to the pre-2006 pensioners. Hence, the pension of the applicant was to be fixed in PB 3 (Rs.15600-39100/-) with Grade Pay of Rs.6600/-.
3.3 The applicant had been drawing basic pension @ Rs.6597/- w.e.f. 1.1.1996 to 31.12.2005, but inadvertently his basic pension was revised to Rs.11,100/- with effect from 1.1.2006 and Rs.12,600/- w.e.f. 24.9.2012. The respondents would revise the pension of the applicant by taking into account his basic pension at Rs.6597/- as on 31.12.2005.
3.4 As per DP&PWs O.M. dated 1.9.2008, all Pension Disbursing Authorities including Public Sector Banks, handling disbursement of pension, had to revise the pension of the Central Government pensioners w.e.f. 1.1.2006, as per the table enclosed with the said OM.
3.5 On the advice of the applicant, the Bank wrongly revised his basic pension at Rs.23050/- with effect from 1.1.2006 by taking into account the pay scale/PB 4 (Rs.37,400-67000) with Grade Pay of Rs.8700/-.
3.6 The applicant had been drawing basic pension of Rs.6597/- with effect from 1.1.1996. On the basis of the advice of the applicant, the pension paying branch of the Punjab National Bank, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi, wrongly revised his basic pension from Rs.6597/- to Rs.23,050/- w.e.f. 1.1.2006. As per the PAO,DGCAs letter dated 11.11.2013 and PAO, CPAOs letter dated 5.12.2013 (Annexure 1 to the OA), the applicants basic pension was revised to Rs.11100/- with effect from 1.1.2006 and to Rs.12600/- with effect from 24.9.2012.
4. Refuting the stand taken by the respondents, the applicant has filed a rejoinder reply wherein, besides reiterating more or less the same averments as in the O.A., the applicant has pointed out the admission made by the respondents that the applicants basic pension was inadvertently and/or wrongly fixed at Rs.11,100/- w.e.f. 1.1.2006 and at Rs.12,600/- with effect from 24.9.2012 and that his basic pension would be revised by taking into account his basic pension as Rs.6597/- as on 31.12.2005. It is also stated by the applicant that as on 31.12.2005 he was on IDA pay scale of Rs.14500-18700/- which was equivalent to CDA pay scale of Rs.14300-18300/- as per the DP&PWs O.M. dated 19.9.2003 (Annexure 5). As per the 6th CPC recommendation, Scale 24 Pay Scale of Rs.14300-18300/- was replaced by the Pay Band 4 (Rs.37400-67000/-) with Grade Pay Rs.8700/- w.e.f. 1.1.2006 and therefore, his basic pension was revised to Rs.23,050/- with effect from 1.1.2006 and as per the 6th CPC recommendation it was the duty of the pension disbursing bank rightly to revise his basic pension to Rs.23,050/- and consequential family pension.
5. The respondents have filed an additional affidavit on 29.8.2014 wherein, besides reiterating their averments and contentions as in the counter reply, it is stated by them that Shri P.L.Gianchandani was a Director in CWC at the time of retirement, and Shri K.A.Nankani was holding the post of Superintending Engineer in C.P.W.D. Both the said posts were in the pre-revised pay scale of Rs.3700-5000/-,which is higher than the CDA pay scale of the applicant at the time of retirement, i.e., Rs.3000-4500/-. Therefore, the cases of S/Shri Gianchandani and Nankani are not comparable with the case of the applicant, and it is a travesty of truth to call these cases as identical.
6. In reply to the additional affidavit filed by the respondents on 29.8.2014, the applicant has filed an affidavit wherein he has more or less reiterated the same averments and contentions as in his OA and rejoinder reply.
7. The respondents have also filed a further additional affidavit on 16.9.2014 along with a copy of the letter dated 20.8.2014 addressed by the Financial Controller, Ministry of Civil Aviation & Ministry of Tourism, New Delhi, to the Executive Director of the Punjab National Bank, New Delhi.
8. I have perused the records and heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
9. From pleadings of the parties, the following issues arise for consideration:
(1) Whether the applicant is entitled to Basic Pension of Rs.2575/- w.e.f. 1.12.1990, Rs.7150/- w.e.f. 1.1.1996, Rs.23050/- w.e.f 1.1.2006, and Rs.27660/- with effect from 1.11.2012 on his reaching the age of 80 years;
(2) Whether as per the directions of the Tribunal and the Honble High Court of Delhi, the respondents ought to have revised the applicants basic pension at Rs.2575/- with effect from 1.12.1990, Rs.7150/- with effect from 1.1.1996, and Rs.23050/- w.e.f. 1.1.2006;
(3) Whether the applicants basic pension was revised to Rs.23,050/- by the Punjab National Bank, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi, in accordance with the DP&PWs O.M. dated 1.9.2008 and O.M. dated 14.10.2008;
(4) Whether the PAO,DGCAs letter dated 11.11.2013 and the PAO, CPAOs letter dated 5.12.2013 revising the applicants basic pension to Rs.11,100/- with effect from 1.1.2006 were violative of Rule 70 of the CCS (Pension) Rules,1972;
(5) Whether the applicants revised Basic Pension at Rs.11,100/- w.e.f. 1.1.2006 was correctly revised by the PAO, DGCA, vide letter dated 11.11.2013, and the PAO, CPAO, vide letter dated 5.12.2013;
(6) Whether the applicant is liable to refund the whole amount of Rs.15,00,000/- paid to him as excess pension w.e.f. 1.1.2006 on the basis of the aforesaid revision of pension made by the Bank; and (7) Whether the applicant is entitled to any relief.
Issue nos.1 & 2:
10. Paragraph 4.8 of the O.A. the applicant states as follows:
4.8 That the Data given below for revising Applicants pension from IDA Pay Scale to equivalent CDA Pay Scale and as recommended by 5th Pay Commission 01.01.1996 and 6th Pay Commission for 01.01.2006 is given below:
a) w.e.f November 1990 revised IDA Pay Scale given and sanctioned by the Tribunal for calculating of pension is equal to Rs.3700-140-4400-150-150-5300 basic pay with 10 increments due to Rs.5150/- per month basic pension should be fixed Rs.2575/- p.m.
b) w.e.f November 1990 basic equal CDA Pay Scale revised Rs.4100-125-4850-150-5300 (DA Scale 24) with total of 8 increments Pay comesto Rs.5150/- p.m. So pension to be fixed in CDA Pay Scale 24 from November 1990 should be equal to Rs.2775/- per month.
c) w.e.f 01.01.1996 Revised Pay Scale given by 5th Pay Commission Scale 24 is Rs.14300-400-18300/- pension comes to Rs.7150/- p.m. but in Applicants case it was fixed only Rs.6597/- per month.
d) National Airport Authority IDA Pay Scale etc. paid for period 01.01.1997 to 31.12.2006 was Rs.14500-18500. So they were equivalent to CDA Pay Scale for period 01.01.1996 to 31.12.1995 is Rs.14300-400-18300 (Scale 24) as per Government of India O.M. dated 19.09.2003.
e) w.e.f. 01.01.2006(Scale 24) as announced by 6th Pay Commission is Rs.37400-6700+8700/- B.P. Accordingly pension of Applicant w.e.f 01.01.2006 comes to Rs.23050/- per month.
f) w.e.f. 01.11.2012 (on reaching age of 80 years) Basic pension to be paid will be Rs.23050+4600 (20% of basic pension comes to Rs.27660/- per month. Family pension w.e.f. 01.01.2006 (30% of 46200) = Rs.13860/- per month. 10.1 The respondents have denied the statements made by the applicant in paragraph 4.8 of the O.A. 10.2 The applicant, along with two others, had filed OA No.1640 of 2006 (Sh.Iqbal Singh Vedi and two others v. Union of India and another) challenging the letter dated 30.10.2006 whereby the Pay & Accounts Officer of the DGCA intimated the Senior Accounts Officer, Central Pension Accounting Office, New Delhi, about the revision of pension of the applicant at Rs.5278/- on CDA pattern with effect from 1.1.1996. The said letter dated 30.10.2006 reads thus:
Sub: Revision of IDA Pension to CDA Pension in respect of the pensioner retired from Autonomous Body/PSU from the date of retirement and further consolidation with effect from 01.01.1996.
A Revised Special Seal Authority for revision of pension authorized on Central Dearness Allowance Pay Scales on retirement from Airport Authority of India to the pensioner (who opted under Central Government rules on retirement on conversion of Government Department into Autonomous Body) to pension on Industrial Dearness Allowance Pay Scales, implemented in Airports Authority of India subsequently (implemented after the date of retirement of the pensioner) and further consolidation thereof with effect from 01.01.1996, is forwarded herewith to authorize the Pension Disbursing Bank for payment of pension as detailed below.
1. Name of the pensioner : Shri I.S.Vedi, Ex-Sr.T.O.
2. Date of retirement from AAI : 30.11.1990
3. PPO No. : 410569100046
4. Category of pension : Superannuation.
REVISION OF PENSION BASED ON CENTRAL DEANRESS ALLOWANCE (CDA) PAY SCALES TO THE PENSION BASED ON INDUSTRIAL ALLOWANCE (IDA) PAY SCALES FROM THE DATE OF RETIREMENT FROM AAI.
(Authority: Note 10 below Rule 33 of CCS (Pension) Rules,1972)
5. Amount of Revised Basic Pension on IDA : Rs.2508/-(Rupees two thousands, five hundreds & eight only).
6. Amount of Revised Pension Commuted : Rs.836/-(Rupees eight hundreds and thirty six only)
7. Reduced Revised Pension on IDA payable : Rs.1672/-(Rupees one thousand, six hundreds & Seventy two only)
8. Period of payment of Revised Pension on IDA payable : 01.12.1990 to 31.12.1995
9. Dearness Relief on Revised IDA Pension : On Basic Pension of Rs.2508/- as applicable from time to time as Industrial Dearness Allowance pattern issued by the Department of Public Enterprises.
10. Differential Commuted value of Pen payable by the bank : Rs.31,380/-(Rupees thirty one thousands, three hundred & eighty only)
11. Difference of DCRG Payable : Not applicable (To be paid by the Head of Office).
CONSOLIDATION OF REVISED IDA PENSION TO CDA PENSION WITH EFFECT FROM 01.01.1996 (Authority: Department of Pension & Pensioners Welfares OM No.4/14/2001-P&PW(D) dated 19-09-2003)
12. Consolidated Basic Pension On IDA : Rs.5278/- (Rupees five thousands, two hundreds & seventy eight only).
13. Amount of pension commuted: Rs.836/-
14. Reduced Consolidated pension on CDA payable : Rs.4442/-(Rupees four thousand, four hundreds & forty two only)
15. Commencement of consolidated Pension on CDA : 01.01.1996
16. Dearness Relief payable on Consolidated Pension : On basic Consolidated Pension of Rs.5278/- as applicable from time to time at Central Dearness Allowance pattern.
MERGER OF 50% DEARNESS RELIEF AS DEARNESS PENSION WITH EFFECT FROM 01.04.2004
17. Dearness Pension : Rs.2639/-(Rupees two thousand six hundreds, & thirty-nine only)) i.e., 50% of basic consolidated pension of Rs.5278.
18. Basic Consolidated Pension Plus Dearness Pension : Rs.7919/- (i.e. Basic Consolidated Pension Rs.5278 plus DP Rs.2639/-.
19. Dearness Relief payable w.e.f. 01.04.2004 : On Rs.7919/-(i.e., Basic Pension plus Dearness Pension as applicable from time to time on CDA pattern).
20. Family pension
(a) Enhanced rate : Not applicable (The period of seven years completed after the date of retirement of the pensioner)
(b) Normal rate : Rs.4500/-(Rupees four thousands and five hundreds only) from the date of death of pensioner, i.e., Basic Family Pension of Rs.3000/- plus Dearness Family Pension Rs.1500/-.
21. Details of family Sr. Name Date of birth Relationship with Eligibility Pensoner 1 Smt. Surinder Kaur 15.12.1941 Wife Till death or re-marriage whichever is earlier.
22. Pension Disbursing Bank: Punjab National Bank, Lajpat Nagar-II, New Delhi 110024 Pensioners Account No. :24096 Conditions in pension payment may be made subject to the condition specified in the PPO as well as the CCS (Pension) Rules and the Treasury Rules. DR payable at IDA pattern from 01.12.1990 may be credited in the authorization to the bank. 10.3 Although the above letter dated 30.10.2006 specifically stated about payment of Dearness Relief on CDA pattern and upward revision of Basic Pension and Basic Family Pension with effect from 1.1.1996 in accordance with Note 10 below Rule 33 of the CCS (Pension)Rules,1972 and the Department of Pension & Pensioners Welfares O.M. dated 19.9.2003, yet the applicant made a grievance against the same on the grounds that by the said letter dated 30.10.2006, the PAO,DGCA, directed payment of Dearness Relief on IDA pattern, that the Basic Pension and Basic Family Pension were reduced in clear violation of Rule 70 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, and that his basic pension was not restored after completion of 15 years from the date of retirement, etc. It is pertinent to mention here that the applicant having retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.11.1990, cannot be said to have completed 15 years as on 1.1.1996, i.e., the date of revision of his pension under the letter dated 30.10.2006 ibid. It is also pertinent to mention here that by the said letter dated 30.10.2006, vide item nos. 1 to 10, the applicants Basic Pension was revised w.e.f. 1.12.1990 to 31.12.1995 and based thereon, the commutation of revised pension, dearness relief thereon on IDA pattern, etc., were determined to be payable up to 31.12.1995 and differential commuted value of pension was determined at Rs.31,308/-.
10.4 However, the Tribunal, vide order dated 4.6.2007, allowed the OA No.1640 of 2006. The operative portion of the order dated 4.6.2007 reads thus:
26. In the light of the foregoing discussion and after a careful consideration of the entire conspectus of the case, the O.A.is allowed with the following directions:
(a) Three PPOs dated 30.10.2006 are quashed and set aside.
(b) Respondents are directed to revise/re-fix the pension of the applicants strictly in accordance with the options exercised by them and in accordance with the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 as well as the terms and conditions of the Vth CPC.
(c) 9% interest on arrears payable to the applicants from the date it became due and till the date of payment.
(d) Applicants be compensated by payment of Rs.10,000 each by the respondents.
(e) The above directions to be complied with within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 10.5 The respondent-Department, being aggrieved by the Tribunals order dated 4.6.2007 (ibid), filed W.P. ( C ) No. 5687 of 2007. The Honble High Court of Delhi, vide interim orders dated 13.12.2007 and 11.7.2013, directed the respondent-Department to comply with the Tribunals direction subject to the applicant and others filing undertakings before the Honble Court to the effect that in case the writ petition eventually succeeds and the amounts received by them are found to be in excess of their legitimate dues, the excess shall be recoverable from their pension.
10.6 In compliance with the directions issued by the Tribunal and the Honble High Court of Delhi, as aforesaid, the PAO,CPAO, vide letter dated 20.3.2008, revised the applicants Basic Pension at Rs.6597/- with effect from 1.1.1996.
10.7 If at all there was any further discrepancy in the said letter dated 20.3.2008, which was issued by the PAO, CPAO,New Delhi, in compliance with the order passed by the Tribunal and the interim orders passed by the Honble High Court of Delhi in W.P. ( C) No. 5687 of 2007, the applicant ought to have approached either the Honble High Court for appropriate orders or the respondent-Department to effect any correction in the said letter dated 20.3.2008, but he did not do so. Thus, it is clear that he accepted the revision of his Basic Pension at Rs.6597/- with effect from 1.1.1996 for all intents and purposes, subject to the result of W.P. ( C ) No.5687 of 2007.
10.8 The applicant has not filed copy of the order issued by the respondent-Department fixing his pay at Rs.5150/- in the IDA pay scale of Rs.3700-5300/- with effect from 2.10.1989 consequent upon introduction of the IDA pay scale in NAA/AAI, vide order dated 18.6.1996, i.e., after the date of his retirement. He has also not filed copy of the PPO issued in February 1991 in his favour granting him pension from 1.12.1990 till the issuance of the letter dated 30.10.2006, which was the subject matter of OA No.1640 of 2006 before this Tribunal. In paragraph 15 of the order dated 4.6.2007 passed in OA No.1640 of 2006, the Tribunal had noted the submission of the applicants (the present applicant and two others) that as they were not drawing pay in IDA pay scale, the question of their pension being re-fixed on IDA DA cannot now arise. In any case, if at all the applicant had any grievance with regard to fixation of his basic pension at Rs.2508/-, instead of Rs.2575/-, he could have agitated the same before the Tribunal in OA No.1640 of 2006. But it appears from the order dated 4.6.2007 passed by the Tribunal in OA No.1640 of 2006 that the applicant or the other two co-applicants did not raise the same before the Tribunal at that point of time. He cannot be allowed to raise the aforesaid grievance in the present O.A. filed in 2013, i.e., after about 23 years from the date of his retirement and after about 7 years from the date of issue of the letter dated 30.10.2006 issued by the PAO, DGCA, more so when W.P. ( C ) No.5687 of 2007 is still pending before the Honble High Court of Delhi. Thus, the applicant cannot be said to have substantiated his claim for fixation of his basic pension at Rs.2575/- with effect from 1.12.1990.
10.9 As regards the applicants claim for revision of his basic pension at Rs.7150/- with effect from 1.1.1996, the applicant has not produced before this Tribunal any material showing that the pre-revised CDA pay scale of Rs.3000-4500/- or the IDA pay scale of Rs.3700-5300/- for the post of Senior Technical Officer in the DGCA/NAA/AAI, which he was holding at the time of retirement on 30.11.1990, was revised to either CDA pay scale of Rs.14300-18300 or IDA pay scale of Rs.14300-18500 or that the said post of Senior Technical Officer in the DGCA/NAA/AAI was upgraded and granted either the CDA pay scale of Rs.14500-18500 or IDA pay scale of Rs.14300-18500. The applicant has also not produced before this Tribunal any material showing that the benefit of such purported upward revision and/or upgradation was applicable to pre-1996 pensioners, like the applicant, for the purpose of revision of their Basic Pension with effect from 1.1.1996. Besides, it appears from the order dated 4.6.2007 passed by the Tribunal in OA No.1640 of 2007 that the applicant or the other two co-applicants did not raise the same before the Tribunal in the said O.A. and therefore, he cannot be allowed to raise the aforesaid grievance in the present O.A. filed in 2013, i.e., after about 23 years from the date of his retirement and after about 7 years from the date of issuance of the letter dated 30.10.2006. In the above view of the matter, it cannot be held that the applicant is entitled to the Revised Basic Pension at Rs.7150/- with effect from 1.1.1996.
10.10 In view of the conclusions arrived at paragraphs 10.8 and 10.9 above, I do not find any substance in the applicants claim for fixation of his Basic Pension at Rs.23050/- with effect from 1.1.2006. It is pertinent to mention here that in compliance with the Tribunals order dated 4.6.2007 passed in OA No.1640 of 2006 and the interim orders dated 13.12.2007 and 11.7.2013 passed by the Honble High Court of Delhi in W.P. ( C ) No. 5687 of 2007, the PAO, CPAO, New Delhi, issued letter dated 20.3.2008 revising his Basic Pension to Rs.6597/- with effect from 1.1.1996. As already found above, in the present O.A. the applicant cannot be allowed to raise the issue relating to revision of his Basic Pension at Rs.2575/- with effect from 1.12.1990 and revision of his Basic Pension to Rs.7150/- with effect from 1.1.1996. It has also been found in the preceding paragraphs that the applicant has not been able to substantiate his aforesaid claims by producing cogent and convincing materials before this Tribunal. In view of this, the applicants claim for revision of Basic Pension to Rs.23,050/- is untenable, besides being unfounded. It is also pertinent to mention here that the PAO,CPAO,New Delhi, has already issued letter dated 5.12.2013 revising his Basic Pension to Rs.11100/- with effect from 1.1.2006, taking into account the 6th CPC pay scale/PB 3 (Rs.15600-39100) and GP Rs.6600/- corresponding to 5th CPC pay scale of Rs.10000-15200/- and 4th CPC pay scale of Rs.3000-4500/- as applicable for the post of Senior Technical Officer in DGCA/NAA/AAI.
10.11 The applicant cannot be said to be similarly placed as S/Shri Gianchandani and Nankani inasmuch as at the time of his retirement the applicants CDA pay scale was Rs.3000-4500/- whereas, as it appears from the documents filed by the applicant himself, at the time of their retirement, S/Shri Gianchandani and Nankani were in receipt of CDA pay scale of Rs.3700-5000/-. Besides, the applicant has not produced the copies of PPOs and pension revision letters issued from time to time in favour of S/Shri Gianchandani and Nankani showing their basic pension at the time of retirement and revision of their pensions from 1.1.1996 and 1.1.2006.
10.12 After going through the order dated 4.6.2007 passed by the Tribunal in OA No.1640 of 2006 and the interim orders dated 13.12.2007 and 11.7.2013 passed by the Honble High Court of Delhi in W.P.( C ) No. 5687 of 2007, I find that neither the Tribunal nor the Honble Court by the said orders directed the respondent-Department to revise the applicants Basic Pension at Rs.2575/- with effect from 1.12.1990, Rs.7150/- with effect from 1.1.1996, and Rs.23050/- w.e.f. 1.1.2006.
10.13 Accordingly, issue nos. 1 and 2 are decided against the applicant.
Issue Nos. 3 and 411. Admittedly, the pension disbursing bank, i.e., Punjab National Bank, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi, revised the applicants Basic Pension to Rs.23050/- with effect from 1.1.2006 on the basis of his letter dated 12.2.2009 (Annexure 8) which is quoted below:
To The Manager, The Punjab National Bank, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi 110024.
Sub: Revision of Pension/Family Pension based on Pay Bands and Grade Pays for Posts carrying Present Scales as per Sixth Pay Commission (based on the First Schedule Part A Section I (Rule 3 of CCS Revised Pay Rules 2008.
Ref: Para 4.2 of OM No.38/37/08-P&PW(A) D/o Pension & PW) Sir,
1. Name of the Pensioner: IQBAL SINGH VEDI
2. Post Held: : Retd. Senior Technical Officer, O/O The D.G.C.A., Safdarjung Airport, New Delhi 110003.
3. P.P.O.No.: 410569100046 dt. Feb.1991
4. DATE OF BIRTH:18.11.1932
5. OLD PAY SCALE: Rs.14500-18500/-
(as on 31.12.2005)
6. REVISED SCALE DUE:
(Post Grade No.24 PB-4) Rs.37400-67000 + Grade Pay 8700
7. Minimum Pay is Revised Scale: Rs.37400 + 8700=Rs.46100
8. Minimum Revised Basic Pension: 50% of 46100/-
(w.e.f.1.1.2006) =Rs.23050
9. Minimum Revised Family Pension: 30% of 46100= (w.e.f. 1.1.2006) Rs.13830/-
10. Dearness Relief due from: 1.1.2006 as admissible from time to time) It is therefore requested that my Pension/Family Pension may kindly be revised accordingly w.e.f. 1.1.2006 and under the terms and condition/guidelines issued under VIth Pay Commission and accordingly arrears due be paid to me.
Thanking you, Yours faithfully, Sd/ (Iqbal Singh Vedi) III/M-5 Lajpat Nagar,New Delhi 110024 11.1 Paragraphs 3.1, 4.1, 4.2 and 8 of the Department of Pensions & Pensioners Welfare, O.M. No.38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 1.9.2008, which has been referred to by the applicant in his letter dated 12.2.2009 (Annexure 8), reads thus:
3.1 In these orders:
a. Existing pensioner or Existing Family pensioner means a pensioner who was drawing/entitled to pension/family pension on 31.12.2005.
b. Existing pension means the basic pension inclusive of commuted portion, if any,due on 31.12.2005. It covers all classes of pension under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 as also Disability Pension under the CCS (Extraordinary Pension) Rules and the corresponding rules applicable to Railway employees and Members of All India Services.
c. Existing family pension means the basic family pension drawn on 31.12.2005 under the CCS (Pension) Rules and the corresponding rules applicable to Railway employees and Members of All India Services.
4.1 The pension/family pension of existing pre-pensioners/family pensioners will be consolidated with effect from 1.1.2006 by adding together:-
i. The existing pension/family pension.
ii. Dearness Pension, where applicable.
iii. Dearness Relief under AICPI (IW) average index 536 (Base year 1982=100) i.e. @ 24% of Basic Pension/Basic family pension plus dearness pension as admissible vide this Departments O.M. No.42/2/2005-P&PW (G) dated 5.4.2006.
iv. Fitment weightage @ 40% of the existing pension/family pension.
Where the existing pension in (i) above includes the effect of merger of 50% of dearness relief w.e.f. 1.4.2004, the existing pension for the purpose of fitment weightage will be re-calculated after excluding the merged dearness relief of 50% from the pension.
The amounts as arrived at will be regarded as consolidated pension/family pension with effect from 1.1.2006.
4.2 The fixation of pension will be subject to the provision that the revised pension, in no case, shall be lower than fifty percent of the minimum of the pay in the pay band plus the grade pay corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired. In the case of HAG and above scales, this will be fifty percent of the minimum of the revised pay scale.
XXX XXX
8. All Pension Disbursing Authorities including Public Sector Banks handling disbursement of pension to the Central Government pensioners are hereby authorized to pay pension/family pension to existing pensioners/family pensioners at the consolidated rates in terms of para 4.1 above without any further authorization from the concerned Accounts Officers/Heads of Office etc. A table indicating the existing basic pension/family pension without Dearness Pension, the basic pension/family pension with dearness pension and the revised consolidated pension/family pension is enclosed for ready reference. (Annexure I).The table may be used where the pensioner is in receipt of a single pension only. Where a pensioner is in receipt of more than one pension, consolidation may be done separately in terms of paragraph 4.1 and as indicated in paragraph 5 floor ceiling of Rs.3500/- may be applied to the total pension from all sources taken together. Wherever the age of pensioners/family pensioner is available on the pension payment order, the additional pension/family pension in terms of para 4.5 above may also be paid by the pension disbursing authorities immediately without any further authorization from the concerned Account Officer/Head of Office, etc. A suitable entry regarding the revised consolidated pension shall be recorded by the pension Disbursing Authorities in both halves of the Pension Payment Order. An intimation regarding disbursement of revised pension maybe sent by the pension disbursing authorities to the Office of CPAO and Accounts Officer which had issued the PPO in the form given at Annexure II so that the latter can update the Pension Payment Order Register maintained by him. An acknowledgement shall be obtained by the Pension Disbursing Authorities from office of CPAO and the respective Accounts Officers in this behalf. 11.2 Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Department of Pensions & Pensioners Welfare, O.M. No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 14.10.2008 reads thus:
4. A revised concordance table (Annexure I) of the pre-1996, pre-2006 and post-2006 and post-2006 pay scales/pay bands is enclosed to facilitate payment of revised pension/family pension in terms of para 4.2 of the OM dated 1.9.2008 (as clarified vide OM dated 3.10.2008) in all cases where fixation of pension under that provision is more beneficial. Some illustrations for calculation of pension/family pension in terms of para 4.2 ibid have been given in Annexure II. It will be the responsibility of the pension disbursing public sector banks to revise and disburse the enhanced pension and arrears in terms of para 4.2 of the OM dated 1.9.2008. Dearness relief at the rates notified from time to time will also be admissible on such revised pension. All the pension disbursing public sector banks are requested to revise and disburse the enhanced pension (with dearness relief) and arrears in terms of para 4.2 of the OM dated 1.9.2008 within one month from the date of issue of this O.M. A suitable entry regarding the revised pension shall be recorded by the pension Disbursing Authorities in both halves of the Pension Payment Order. An intimation regarding disbursement of revised pension may be sent by the pension disbursing authorities to the office of CPAO and Accounts Officer which had issued the PPO in the revised form given at Annexure III so that they can verify the pension so revised and update the Pension Payment Order Register, etc. An acknowledgement shall be obtained by the Pension Disbursing Authorities from Office of CPAO and the respective Accounts Officers in this behalf.
5. In case any information regarding date of birth, scale of pay or the qualifying service, etc. is not available with the bank, the bank may obtain the requisite information from the concerned Pay & Accounts Officer/CPAO. It will be the responsibility of the Pay & Accounts Officer/CPAO to provide the information from the available records within two weeks of the receipt of request from the bank. 11.3 In the letter dated 12.2.2009, though the applicant correctly mentioned the post held by him at the time of retirement and the P.P.O. number, and his date of birth, yet he made wrong and/or false statements in the said letter that his old pay scale was Rs.14500-18500/-, that his 6th CPC revised pay scale/PB & GP was PB 4(37400-67000) & Grade Pay Rs.8700/-as on 1.1.2006, that his minimum pay in the revised scale was Rs.46,100/-; that his minimum Revised Basic Pension was Rs.23,050/- with effect from 1.1.2006; that his minimum Revised Family Pension was Rs.13830/- with effect from 1.1.2006; and that dearness relief due on his Revised Pension with effect from 1.1.2006 was at the rate(s) as announced by the Government of India from time to time. As already found, his Basic Pension was revised to 6597/- on CDA pay scale with effect from 1.1.1996 and he was in receipt of the pension at the said rate till 31.12.2005, vide PAO, CPAOs letter dated 20.3.2008 which was issued in compliance with the directions of the Tribunal and the Honble High Court of Delhi. The applicant never questioned the said letter dated 20.3.2008 either before the respondent-Department or before the Honble High Court of Delhi in which W.P. ( C ) No. 5687 of 2007 is still pending. It has also been found in the preceding paragraphs that the CDA pay scale of the post of Senior Technical Officer in the DGCA/NAA/AAI, at all relevant times, was Rs.3000-4500/- (4th CPC) and Rs.10000-15200 (5th CPC) which correspond to 6th CPCs PB 3 (Rs.15600-29100) & GP Rs.6600/- with effect from 1.1.2006.
11.4 In the instant case, the pension disbursing bank, i.e., the Punjab National Bank, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi, was already having the copies of the applicants PPO issued in February 1991 and the revised letters dated 30.10.2006 and 20.3.2008 ibid. On the basis thereof, the said bank was disbursing pension and arrears to the applicant till January 2009. When the said bank received the applicants letter dated 12.2.2009 requesting it to revise and disburse his revised pension and arrears with effect from 1.1.2006, it (the bank) should have referred to the applicants PPO issued in February 1991 and the PAO, CPAOs letter dated 20.3.2008. In the absence of any mention about the 5th CPC pay scale of Rs.14300-400-18300 or Rs.14,500-18500/- in the PAO, CPAOs letter dated 20.3.2008, by which the applicants basic pension was revised to Rs.6597/- with effect from 1.1.1996, the Bank ought to have called for the necessary information from the PAO,DGCA and the PAO, CPAO regarding the scale of pay, etc., of the applicant, before revising the applicants basic pension at Rs.23,050/-, in terms of paragraph 5 of the DP&PWs OM dated 14.10.2008. Had the Bank called for the aforesaid information, the PAO,DGCA and the PAO, CPAO, would have intimated the Bank about the pay scale, etc., of the applicant. Instead of doing that, the Bank acted on the applicants letter dated 12.2.2009 and revised his basic pension at Rs.23,050/- w.e.f. 1.1.2006 and disbursed the arrears, which was not prescribed in the DP&PWs O.M. dated 1.9.2008 and O.M. dated 14.10.2008. It is, thus, clear that on account of misrepresentation of facts by the applicant in his letter dated 12.2.2009, the pension disbursing public sector bank, i.e., Punjab National Bank, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi, without having due regard to the DP&PWs O.M. dated 1.9.2008 and O.M. dated 14.10.2008, revised the applicants Basic Pension at Rs.23,050/- and disbursed the said revised pension and arrears to the applicant till the PAO, CPAOs letter dated 5.12.2013 was received by the bank.
11.5 The Financial Controller, Ministry of Civil Aviation & Ministry of Tourism, New Delhi, addressed a letter dated 20.8.2014 to the Executive Director, Punjab National Bank (Head Office). The said letter dated 20.8.2014 reads thus:
I would like to inform you that one pensioner of this office, Shri Iqbal Singh Vedi, holder of PPO No. 410569100046 is drawing his pension form Lajpat Nagar,New Delhi branch through Saving Bank Account No.0992000100240968. As per O.M. No.F.No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 1st September,2008, from Department of Pension & Pensioners Welfare, all Pension Disbursing Authorities including Public Sector Banks, handling disbursement of pension are to revise the pension of Central Government pensioners w.e.f. 01.01.2006 as per the table enclosed with the said O.M.. The Lajpat Nagar Branch of your bank had received the pension of the said pensioner to Rs.23050.00 w.e.f. 01.01.2006, whereas as per the table attached with the aforesaid O.M. it should have been fixed as Rs.14911.00. My office had requested to your Lajpat Nagar branch to intimate the reasons/basis of fixation of his pension as Rs.23050.00, instead of the formula given in the O.M. dated 01.09.2008 vide letter dated 24.04.2014 and subsequent reminder dated 12.06.2014, but no reply has been received from them so far.
I would therefore request you kindly to intimate me the reason/basis of fixation of pension of Rs.23050.00 w.e.f. 01.01.2006 in respect of Shri Iqbal Singh Vedi, holder of P.P.O.No. 410569100046. 11.6 In reply to the said letter dated 20.8.2014, the Executive Director, Punjab National Bank (Head Office), in his letter dated 28.8.2014 stated as follows:
REG-EXCESS PENSION PAYMENT TO SHRI IQBAL SINGH VEDI.
I thankfully acknowledge the receipt of DO letter No. CPAO/CAD/SAP/1271/14-15 dated 20.08.2014 addressed to Shri Gauri Shankar, Executive Director regarding pension payment to Sh.Iqbal Singh Vedi.
On perusal of the matter it has been observed that correct pension was being paid @Rs.14911/- corresponding to pre-revised Basic Pension 6597/-(as per 5th CPC) up to Feb.2009, no revised PPO as per 6thCPC was received at that time. Meanwhile, the pensioner made a representation dated 12.02.2009 citing Para 4.2 of O.M. No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 01.09.2008 of department of Pension & Pensioners Welfare and misrepresented the facts about his original pay scale and corresponding revised scale under 6th CPC. Being his representation as true and correct statement of facts, the dealing official at branch relied upon him and paid the relief to him as in original PPO as well as in revision authority dated 20.3.2008 of Rs.6597/-, there was no mention of pay band, Branch. Branch also submitted Annexure III to Pay & Accounts Office (PAO).
Subsequently, the Government took an exercise of revising PPOs and revised PPO dated 05.12.2013 was received by the branch. The Branch thereafter came to know that the pensioner in his representation dated 12.02.2009 had with a dishonest intention to derive wrongful benefit given wrong facts and figures. Accordingly, the branch reduced the pension & raised the claim for refund of the overpaid amount based on the authority given by the pensioner. The pensioner then moved to CAT against effecting such recovery. Even the revised PPO dated 5.12.2013 mentioning the Basic Pension as Rs.11,100/- w.e.f. 1.1.2006 (instead of Rs.14,911/- corresponding to Rs.6597/- pre-revised, as correctly mentioned in your aforesaid DO letter) and Rs.12,600/- w.e.f. 24.9.2012, on the basis of which recovery has been initiated, is also not correct. Since the petitioner has misrepresented the facts, suitable action needs to be taken against him.
Branch has marked lien in deposit accounts of the pensioner. There is a balance of Rs.20175/- in his a/c after effecting recovery of Rs.2,16,900/- which is kept in Sundry. He is having a tax saving FD of Rs.1,00,000/- which is to be matured on 01.11.2017 and has started to recover 1/3rd of pension as per the guidelines. Matter is also being pursued with the pensioner for effecting the recovery in lump sum. 11.7 From the above, it is found that the revision of the Basic Pension of the applicant as made by the pension disbursing public sector bank is clearly in contravention of the O.M. dated 1.9.2008 and 14.10.2008 issued by the DP&PW and is also vitiated on account of misrepresentation and/or fraud perpetrated by the applicant. Therefore, the applicant cannot be said to have a right to the said revised basic pension. As a consequence, on the basis of the aforesaid invalid revision of pension made by the bank, the applicant cannot be allowed to call in question the letter dated 11.11.2013 issued by the PAO, DGCA and the letter dated 5.12.2013 issued by the PAO, CPAO, New Delhi, revising his basic pension at Rs.11,100/- with effect from 1.1.2006, as being violative of Rule 70 of the CCS (Pension)Rules,1972.
11.8 Accordingly, issue nos. 3 and 4 are decided against the applicant.
Issue No.5 & 6:
12. The PAO, DGCA, vide letter dated 11.11.2013, revised the Basic Pension of the applicant at Rs.11100/- with effect from 1.1.2006. On the basis of the said letter dated 11.11.2013, the PAO, CPAO, vide letter dated 5.12.2013, also revised the Basic Pension of the applicant at Rs.11,100/-with effect from 1.1.2006. As noted earlier, the applicants Basic Pension was revised to Rs.6597/- with effect from 1.1.1996, vide PAO, CPAOs letter dated 20.3.2008. The PAO, DGCA and the PAO, Central Pension Accounting Office, while revising the Basic Pension of the applicant at Rs.11,100/- with effect from 1.1.2006, appear to have lost sight of the DP&PWs O.M. dated 1.9.2008 and O.M. dated 14.10.2008, particularly the table annexed to the O.M. dated 1.9.2008. As per the said table, the Basic Pension of Rs.6597/- of the applicant, a pre-2006 pensioner, ought to have been revised to Rs.14,911/- with effect from 1.1.2006, whereas the PAO, DGCA and the PAO, CPAO, vide letters dated 11.11.2013 and dated 5.12.2013 revised the applicants Basic Pension at Rs.11,100/-, i.e., 50% of the minimum of the PB (Rs.15600-39100) plus GP Rs.6600/- which is totally wrong. Although this mistake has not been clearly mentioned by the respondent-Department in the counter reply or any of the affidavits subsequently filed by them, yet it has been mentioned in the counter reply that the applicants Basic Pension with effect from 1.1.2006 has not been revised taking into account the applicants Basic Pension of Rs.6597/- revised with effect from 1.1.1996, vide PAO, CPAOs letter dated 20.3.2008. Thus, it is clear that the applicants Basic Pension being not revised with effect from 1.1.2006 in accordance with the DP&PWs O.M. dated 1.9.2008, the aforesaid letter dated 11.11.2013 issued by the PAO, DGCA, and the letter dated 5.12.2013 issued by the PAO, CPAO, are unsustainable and liable to be quashed.
12.1 As has been found in the preceding paragraphs, the applicant is not entitled to the revised basic pension of Rs.23,050/- w.e.f. 1.1.2006, and the PAO,DGCA as well as the PAO,CPAO, without having due regard to the DP&PWs O.M. dated 1.9.2008 and O.M. dated 14.10.2008, wrongly revised his basic pension at Rs.11,100/-, instead of Rs.14,911/-, w.e.f. 1.1.2006. The letter dated 26.2.2014 (Annexure 9) issued by the Punjab National Bank, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi, asking the applicant to refund Rs.15,00,000/- paid to him as excess pension w.e.f. 1.1.2006, being based the applicants revised basic pension at Rs.11,100/- w.e.f. 1.1.2006, as per the PAO, DGCAs letter dated 11.11.2013 and the PAO, CPAOs letter dated 5.12.2013, the applicant cannot be held liable to pay the whole amount of Rs.15,00,000/- paid to him as excess pension, and his liability to refund the excess pension paid to him is required to be re-determined by the Bank in the manner outlined in paragraph 13 of this order.
12.2 Issue nos. 5 and 6 are accordingly decided.
Issue No.7
13. In view of the above findings on issue nos. 5 and 6, I quash and set aside the letter dated 11.11.2013 issued by the PAO, DGCA and the letter dated 5.12.2013 issued by the PAO, CPAO. Accordingly, I direct the respondents to re-determine the applicants Basic Pension with effect from 1.1.2006 in accordance the P&PWs O.M. dated 1.9.2008 and communicate the same to the PAO, CPAO, for issuance of the pension revision letter revising the Basic Pension of the applicant with effect from 1.1.2006 and the enhanced Basic Pension with effect from the date when the applicant completed 80 years of age. The PAO, DGCA and PAO,CPAO are also directed to re-determine the entitlement of the applicant to get basic pension of Rs.6597/- without reduction towards commutation of pension with effect from the date of completion of 15 years from the date of his retirement from 1.12.1990. On the basis of the revision of the applicants basic pension, as directed above, the pension disbursing public sector bank, i.e., Punjab National Bank, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi, shall re-determine the liability of the applicant as regards excess pension, etc., paid on account of the aforesaid wrong revision of the Basic Pension and communicate the same to the applicant. If any excess pension or arrear of pension, etc., is found to have been made by the bank, the applicant shall refund the same within the time stipulated by the bank, otherwise the bank shall be at liberty to recover the same from the applicants pension. Until then, the letter dated 26.2.2014 issued by the Punjab National Bank, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi, is kept in abeyance. It is made clear that the applicants Revised Basic Pension at Rs.6597/- with effect from 1.1.1996 and the Revised Basic Pension now directed to be determined by the respondent-Department by taking into account the aforesaid Basic Pension at Rs.6597/- shall be subject to the outcome of W.P. (C ) No.5687 of 2007 filed by the respondent-Department before the Honble High Court of Delhi challenging the Tribunals order dated 4.6.2007 passed in OA No.1640 of 2006
14. In the result, the Original Application is partly allowed to the extent indicated above. No costs.
(RAJ VIR SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER AN