K.S.Dhall & Ors v. UOI &Ors

MOOL CHAND GARG, J.

FEBRUARY 15, 2010

ANIL KUMAR, J. 'anb'

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P. (C.) No. 8440/2009 % Date of Decision:15.02.2010 K.S. DHALL & ANOTHER …. Petitioners Through Mr. S. Ravi Shankar, Advocate. Versus UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS …. Respondents Through Mr. Rajesh Katyal, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOOL CHAND GARG 1. Whether reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? YES 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? YES 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? YES : MOOL CHAND GARG, J. 1. Petitioner No.1 is an employee while Petitioner No.2 is an association of employees of National Airports Authority of India (NAAI), a Public Sector Undertaking (PSU), who earlier had been working with the Central Government and were absorbed permanently in the said PSU on the basis of a decision taken by the Government of India, i.e., respondent No.1 w.e.f. 01.06.1986 with the conditions that they would hold the office in NAAI on deputation by the same tenure and upon the same terms and conditions in respect of remuneration, leave, provident fund, retirement or other terminal benefits as they should have held such office if NAAI has not been constituted and shall continue to do so until duly absorbed by NAAI in its regular service. In fact additional benefits were also provided to those persons for getting 100% commutation of the retiral benefits including gratuity as provided under Rule 37A of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the "Pension Rules") as it existed on that day and provided as follows: Rule 37-A : Payment of lump sum amount to person on absorption in or under a Corporation, company or body. (1) Where a Government servant referred to in Rule 37 elects the alternative of receiving the (retirement gratuity) and a lump sum amount in lieu of pension he shall in addition to the (retirement gratuity) be granted: (a) on an application made in this behalf, a lump sum amount not exceeding the commuted value of one-third of his pension as may be admissible to him in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Pensions (Commutation) Rules, and (b) terminal benefits equal to the commuted value of the balance amount of pension left after commuting one-third of pension to be worked out with reference to the commutation tables obtaining on the date from which the commuted value becomes payable subject to the condition that the Government servant surrenders his right of drawing two-thirds of his pension. 2. In the case of all the petitioners, it was implemented by providing commutation of 100% pension in the following manner: a) 1/3rd of the amount to be commuted immediately at the time of absorption. b) 2/3rd of the amount of pension to be commuted and given to those persons after 7 years of the date of absorption. 3. Thereafter, a judgment was delivered by the Supreme Court in the Common Cause, A Registered Society and Ors. vs. Union of India (1987) 1 SCC 142. Pursuant to the aforesaid judgment, a new Rule was brought in vide notification dated 30.09.2000 published as Central Service (Pension Amendment) Rules, 2000 by which all the Central Government employees were held entitled to draw pension against commutation of 1/3rd of the retiral benefits. Even though this judgment was not given in the case of employees of a PSU such as the petitioners, this benefit was also extended to them. 4. The lis subject matter of present writ petition is the desire of the petitioners seeking restoration of the commuted portion of the pension in respect of the terminal benefits of 2/3rd of the pension after 15 years of their absorption on the plea that the said 2/3rd amount was given to them after 7 years of their absorption on the principles laid down in the "Common Cause" judgment (supra). 5. After 'Common Cause' judgment the petitioners also gave a representation in this regard to the respondents on 21.08.2003 i.e. after 16 years of Common Cause judgment. Since the said re