NITIN JAGDISHCHADRA PANDE Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard the petitioner-in-person as well as the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India for the respondents for some time.

(2.) One of the contentions raised by the petitioner- in-person as regards eligibility for appointment as Officer-In-Charge, Polyclinic is that notwithstanding the change effected in the requisite eligibility on 15/12/2021, a retired service officer from the Armed Forces should be drawing pension from defence estimates through the Controller of Defence Accounts (CDA). Our attention is invited to the Defence Services Regulations with regard to the pension for the Army and especially Clause 4 (viii) which defines "pension" to include gratuity. It is submitted that the petitioner-in-person has received gratuity through the CDA and hence is eligible in terms of paragraph 4(viii) of the relevant Regulations for appointment as Officer-In-Charge

(3.) According to the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, since, the petitioner-in-person is not drawing pension from the CDA, he is not eligible for appointment as Officer-In-Charge .