DEOKULE VAMAL SHANKAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for issuing writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the respondents to grant and pay pension and other death-cum-retirement benefits gratuity etc. to the petitioner admissible under Military Service Rules.

(2.) The petitioner was selected and appointed in the rank of Lieutenant in the Military Nursing Service (Local) vide order dated 24-2-1966 issued by the Director General Armed Forces Medical Services New Delhi (Annex. A). Pursuant to this order the petitioner had joined services as Lieutenant Military Nursing Service at Military Hospital Baroda on 21-3-1966. Thereafter appreciating her services President of India was pleased to issue Presidents Commission on 9 and her services were confirmed from the date of her appointment i.e. 21 (Annex B). That on attaining the superannuation age she has retired on 31-2-1982 from the services. According to the petitioner she has rendered services during the period from 21-3-1966 to 31 Thus in all she has rendered 17 years and 9 months total service in the respondent department. However she has not been paid any pensionary benefits available to a retired military personnel under the Rules. Her claim for pension has been rejected by the Govt. of India Department of Pension & Pensioners Welfare by a letter dated 24-2-1990 (Annex. F). Hence this petition.

(3.) It has been submitted by Mr. G. I. Desai learned Advocate for the petitioner that the Govt. of India has introduced Pension Scheme in place of Contributory Provident Fund Scheme and the said scheme was also made applicable to the Central Government Services including Military Services. It has been further submitted that the pensioners are one class if they form one class their computation cannot be by different formula affording unequal treatment solely on the ground that some retired early and some retired later. He has further submitted that the Govt. of India has accepted recommendations of 4th Pay Commission Report regarding grant of benefits like pension death-cum-retirement benefits to those temporary and quasi-permanent employees retiring at the age of superannuation after rendering 10 years total service on the same scale as admissible to the permanent employees. To substantiate his arguments Mr. Desai learned Advocate for the petitioner has placed reliance on the case of D.S. Nakars & Ors. v. Union of India AIR 1983 SC 130.