S P GANGULY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant retired from service on 13/11/1985. At the time of his retirement, he was holding the post of Commissioner-cum-Secretary in the finance Department of the government of Tripura. His grievance in this appeal is with regard to the denial of Dearness Relief on the basis of the Office memorandum dated 16/4/1987 whereby relief has been given with effect from 1/1/1986 to certain categories of pensioners but has been denied to pensioners, including the appellant, who retired between 31/3/1985 and 31/12/1985. The case of the appellant is that as a result of the said denial he is losing Rs. 146. 00 per month. From the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents before this court, it appears that the total amount of pension which is being paid to the appellant is more than what is being paid to the three categories of pensioners who have been given the benefit of the deamess relief under Office memorandum dated 16/4/1987. This would show that in substance, theappellant is not worse off. As pointed out by this court, no scheme of pension can be held to be foolproof so as to cover and keep in view all persons who are retired from service. [see Union of India v. P. N. Menon Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not consider that a case is made out warranting interference with the impugned order passed by the central Administrative tribunal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. No costs.