Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi

Shri Prakash Narain vs Union Of India Through on 23 May, 2013

      

  

  

 Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi

O.A.No.1715/2013

Thursday, this the 23rd day of May2013

Honble Shri A.K. Bhardwaj, Member (J)

Shri Prakash Narain
Age 87 years
s/p Shri P L Saxena
r/o 201, Sidharth Enclave
Ashram Chowk, Ring Road
New Delhi-14
(Retired as Accountant Member, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal)
..Applicant
(By Advocates: Shri S K Gupta and Shri Vishnu Sharma)

Versus

Union of India through

1.	Secretary
Department of Personnel
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance & Pensions
North Block, New Delhi

2.	Secretary
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
North Block, New Delhi

3.	Pay & Accounts Officer
Central Pension Accounting Office
Govt. of India
Trikoot-2, Bhikaji Cama Palace
New Delhi

4.	Pay & Account Officer (LA)
Ministry of Law, Justice and Legal Affairs
4th Floor, Janpath Bhawan
Janpath, New Delhi-1

5.	Centralized Pension Processing Centre
State Bank of India
2nd Floor, Chandni Chowk, Delhi-6
..Respondents
(By Advocate: Shri Inderjit Singh for Shri Rajinder Nischal)





O R D E R (ORAL)

On implementation of the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission, pension of the applicant was fixed in terms of Governments Resolution No.38/37/08-P&PW (A) dated 29.8.2008, i.e., at 50% of the minimum of the pay band and the grade pay of the post from which he retired. Subsequently, his pension is reduced proportionately on the ground that he had not completed the qualifying service for full pension at the time of retirement, i.e., 33 years.

2. Shir S K Gupta, learned counsel for applicant submitted that if the service rendered by the applicant as Accountant Member, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) is taken into account, he had rendered more than 33 years of qualifying service for pension. He has also placed reliance upon the decision rendered by the Full Bench of this Tribunal in batch of Original Applications, including O.A. No.655/2010  Central Government SAG (S-29) Pensioners Association through its Secretary v. Union of India & another, decided on 1.11.2011, to contend that irrespective of the length of service rendered by the employee at the time of his retirement, in view of the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission and the Resolution dated 29.8.2008, the pension of pre-1.1.2006 retiree has to be fixed at 50% of the minimum of the pay band and the grade pay admissible for the post from which he retired.

3. Heard. Issue notice to the respondents. Shri Inderjit Singh, learned proxy counsel for Shri Rajinder Nischal, learned counsel entered appearance on behalf of respondents. He fairly concedes that the claim of the applicant deserves to be considered in view of the judgment of the Full Bench of this Tribunal (supra) as upheld by the Honble High Court of Delhi in W.P. (C) No.1535/2012 with connected petitions, decided on 29.4.2013, thus the respondents would reconsider the claim of the applicant in view of the said judgment and till the outcome of such reexamination, they will not reduce the pension of the applicant.

4. In view of the statement made by learned proxy counsel for respondents, O.A. stands disposed of. No costs.

( A.K. Bhardwaj ) Member (J) /sunil/