CHANDANBEN M NAGRASHNA SMT Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Believe it or not it is seriously contended that additional payment by way of special pay made to a Govt. Servant for the burden of additional work imposed on him by the State Government will not qualify for computation of his pension merely because the Government secures reimbursement from a statutory Corporation for such additional payment. And that is why question pertaining to fixation of the pension payable to a judge of the Labour Court who retired on July 30 1969 remained unresolved during his lifetime (he died on June 15 1975 and is being now resolved in the course of the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India instituted by the heirs and the Legal representatives of the said Official.

(2.) The question is whether in making computation of the pension payable to the official concerned special pay paid to him at the rate be Rs. 100.00 per month from June 1 1967 till March 31 1970 in connection with the functions entrusted to him as a Judge of the Employees State Insurance Court constituted under the Employees State Insurance Act of 1948 should be included The respondents contend that it should be included. The respondents resist the claim on the ground that the Accounts Officer of the Office of the Accountant General of Gujarat at Ahmedabad has expressed the opinion that it cannot be so included for reasons mentioned in Annexure A dated October 24 1972 The communication in question in so far as material reads as under :

(3.) The petition must therefore succeed. The respondents are directed to make computation of the pension payable to the Official concerned namely Shri M. N. Nagrashna on the date of his retirement by including the monthly sum of Rs. 100.00 which was being paid to him by way of special pay. Computation on this basis shall be made latest by March 31 1980 and the payment of the amount due to the petitioners by way of arrears of pension as also gratuity shall be made to the petitioners within thirty days thereof. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent with costs.Petition allowed.