DY DIRECTOR GENERAL ADMN Vs. S.VEERABHADRAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Writ Petition instituted under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal rendered in an Original Application filed by the respondent herein.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners establishment and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

(3.) The respondent was an employee of National Sample Survey Organization (for short, NSSO). He was thereafter absorbed in the National Hydro Electric Power Corporation (for short, NHPC). The issue that went up to the Tribunal was as to the benefits that the respondent was entitled to from the date of his retirement from the NHPC till restoration of his 1/3rd commutation pension on 05.07.1999. It was his specific contention before the Tribunal that similarly situated persons had been granted such reliefs in O.A.Nos.1333 of 2012, 1267 of 2015 and 1224 of 2015. The Tribunal, after perusing the pleadings of the establishment, held that there is no dispute on the basic facts of the case, though the establishment had pleaded that in terms of the Office Memorandum dated 23.06.2017 of the Department of Pension & Pensioners Welfare, the Ministries and Departments of Government of India were directed to allow restoration of full pension after expiry of the commutation period of 15 years from the date of payment of 100% lumpsum amount to all absorbee pensioners. Adjudicating on the basis of the decided cases of similarly situated persons, the Tribunal held that the applicant before it, who is the respondent in this Writ Petition, was eligible to be granted reliefs in the light of the decisions of the Tribunal in O.A.Nos.1333 of 2012, 1267 of 2015 and 1224 of 2015. The plea that was projected by the establishment that a review petition is filed and pending as against the judgment in W.P.No.21824 of 2010 was not decisive. The Tribunal was justified in taking the view that in at least three cases of similarly situated persons, relief was granted and, therefore, the applicant was entitled to the relief.