MATHURA DASS S Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners in this writ petition are seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to extend them the benefits under letter bearing No. 10/77/88 -PP1/10304 dated 24.11.1988 and letter bearing No. 16/85/79 -6FR/9285 dated 9.7.1985.

(2.) THE petitioners who worked as Head Constable, Inspector of Police and Deputy Secretary, Government of Punjab retired on 26.7.1983, 31.12.1981 and 31.10.1981 respectively. After their retirement, the Government issued a letter dated 9.7.1985 in regard to the treatment of the portion of dearness allowance as darness pay for the purpose of retirement benefits i.e. for calculating pension, gratuity, DCRG and terminal gratuity and the said benefits were extended to the employees retireing on or before 31.3.1985. Vide letter No. 10/77/88 -PP1/10304 dated 24.11.1988, the employees were allowed accumulation of earned leave upto 360 days and encashment of leave at the time of retirement was admissible upto 240 days and discretion of availing earned leave at a time was also 24.11.1988 were made effective from 1.1.1986. The case of the petitioners is that though they retired earlier to the date from which these benefits were extended, they are also entitled to the same since they belonged to the class of pensioners and there cannot be any discriminatory treatment. Thus, the only point that arises for determination in this writ petition is, whether, the Government is entitled to impose a cut off date in extending the benefits covered by two letters referred to above. In other words, whether the benefits under the two letters can be extended to those employees who retired prior to the dates mentioned in those two letters. The benefits under the first letter were made effective from 31.3.1985 while the benefits under the second letter were made effective from 24.11.1988 and they are not made applicable to those persons who retired prior to those dates. In number of cases, the Apex Court held that it is open to the Government while extending the additional benefits to the retirees to have a cut off date and extend the benefits to those employees who retired on or after that date.

(3.) IN Union of India v. P.N. Menon and others, JT 1994(3) SC 26 : 1994(4) SCT 91 (SC), it has been held as follows : -