UNION OF INDIA Vs. CHHAGANBHAI CHAUHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Ms. Reena Kanani, learned advocate waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent. In the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent of the learned advocate for the respective parties, present application is taken up for final hearing today.

(2.) By way of this petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners-original applicants have prayed for an appropriate writ, direction and order to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad dated 25.01.2017 passed in Original Application No. 622 of 2016, by which, the learned Tribunal has allowed the said OA preferred by the respondent herein and has directed the Department to treat that the applicant has minimum qualifying service of 10 years for the purpose of pensionary benefits and has directed to sanction the pension accordingly and to pay arrears commencing from 1.9.2013.

(3.) According to the Department as the respondent herein - original applicant did not complete the qualifying service of 9.5 years required for the purpose of pension/pensionary benefits and therefore, original applicant was denied the pensionary benefits. However, considering the fact that original applicant had completed 9 years 8 months and 14 days even according to the department and therefore, on interpretation of Rule 49, more particularly, sub-rule (3) of Rule 49 of Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1972 and relying upon a decision of the Punjab and Hariyana High Court in the case of Jagtar Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Ors. [Civil Writ Petition No. 7889 of 2014 dated 11.2.2015] and decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Union of India & Ors M. Iiangopathy and Anrs., [W.P. No.29946 of 2014 dated 05.01.2015], the learned Tribunal has held and observed that complete fraction of an year shall be completed as half year and therefore, it can be said that the original applicant has completed the qualifying service and it is held that the original applicant is entitled to pension/pensionary benefits. That the learned Tribunal did not accept the defence of department that the original applicant shall not be entitled to relief on the ground of delay and laches relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shiv Dass vs. Union of India and Ors., reported in AIR 2007 SC 1330 and as such restricted the arrears of pension of last three years only and it is directed that the arrears of pension be paid w.e.f. 1.9.2013 only.