No.19/116/2024-Pers.Pol.(Pay)(Pt)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training

North Block, New Delhi
Dated the 14th October, 2024.

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: Grant of notional increment on 1st July/ 1st January to the employees who retired from Central Govt.service on 30th June / 31st December respectively for the purpose of calculating their pensionary benefits – regarding.

The undersigned is directed to say that in terms of Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Revise Pay) Rules, 2006, notified by D/o Expenditure vide Notification No.G.S.R.622 (E) dated 29.08.2008, date of annual increment was made uniform viz. 1st July of every year with effect from 01.01.2006. It was subsequently decided vide Rule 10 (1) of the Central Civil Services (Revise Pay) Rules, 2016, notified by D/o Expenditure vide Notification No.G.S.R.721 (E) dated 25.07.2016, that there shall be two dates for grant of increment namely 1st January and 1st July of every year.

2. Hon’ble High Court of Madras in its Order dated 15.09.2017 in W.P.No.15732 of 2017-P.Ayyamperumal Vs Union of India & Ors. allowed grant of notional increment to the petitioner on the day following the date of his retirement from service for the purpose of calculation of pensionary benefits. Judgement in the case of Shri P.Ayyamperumal was implemented in personam. Following this, D/o Personnel and Training (DOPT) received a number of representations from the employees who superannuated on 30th June/ 31st December claiming similar benefit. Large number of Court cases have also been filed before Hon’ble Administrative Tribunals, High Courts and Supreme Court on the subject matter.

3. The issue was examined in consultation with the nodal authorities concerned and with due regard to the relevant provisions in the Fundamental Rules (FRs) which regulate grant of increment to the Central Government employees. It is pertinent to note that FR 9(21) (a) defines ‘pay’ as the amount sanctioned to a Government servant for a post held by him substantively or in an officiating capacity or to which he is entitled by reason of his position in a cadre.FR 17 provides that subject to any exceptions specifically made in these Rules, an employee shall begin to draw the pay and allowances attached to his tenure of a post with effect from the date when he assumes the duties of that post and shall cease to draw them as soon as he ceases to discharge those duties. Further, FR 24 stipulates that an increment may be withheld from a Government servant if his conduct has not been good or his work has not been satisfactory. To summarise these Rule provisions, for availing the benefit of an increment on the date of its accrual, an employee should be in service, should have rendered satisfactory work and should have displayed good conduct during the period of qualifying service.

4. However, Hon’ble Supreme Court vide Order dated 11.04.2023 in Civil Appeal No.2471 of 2023 (@SLP (C) No.6185/2020) – Director (Admn.and HR), KPTCL Vs C.P.Mundinamani & Ors, upheld the Orders passed by the Division Bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in Writ Appeal No.4193/2017 allowing grant of one annual increment, which the original writ petitioners earned on the last day of their service for rendering services during preceding one year from the date of retirement with good behaviour and efficiently, for the purpose of calculating the retiral benefits. However, Union of India was not among the Parties in the said case.

and have rendered the requisite qualifying service as on the date of their superannuation with satisfactory work and good conduct for calculating the pension admissible to them. As specifically mentioned in the Orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, grant of the notional increment on 1st January/1st July shall be reckoned only for the purpose of calculating the pension admissible and not for the purpose of calculation of other pensionary benefits.

8. It may also be noted that these instructions are being issued in compliance of the Interim Orders dated 06.09.2024 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in MA Dy.No.2400/2024 without prejudice to the legal stand of the Union of India in the matter and without prejudice to any change of law in this regard.Further, the action taken shall be subject to the final outcome of the Review Petition (Dy.No.36418/2024) pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court which is expected to be heard by the Apex Court in the week commencing 04.11.2024,

9. This issues with the concurrence of D/o Expenditure vide their Dy.No.08- 09/2019-E.III.A(Vol.III) (3969602) dated 08.10.2024 and D/o Legal Affairs vide Computer Dy.No.E 128445 dated 30.09.2024.

10. Hindi Version will follow.

(Mahesh Kumar)
Under Secretary to the Government of India

To
All Ministries/ Departments of Government of India.

Download DoP&T O.M. dated 14.10.2024 purpose of calculating their pensionary benefits

The post Grant of notional increment on 1st July/ 1st January to the employees who retired from Central Govt service on 30th June / 31st December respectively for the purpose of calculating their pensionary benefits – DoPT appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

File no. 2/3/2023-EC-IV(SC) /190-E
Directorate General
Central Public Works Department
EC-IV (SC) Room No. 109 A Wing

Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi.
Dated the 20 February.2024

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: Grant of notional increment (as due on 1st Jan./ 1st July) to the officers/ employees superannuated on 31st Dec./ 30th June and revision of pensionary benefits.

The undersigned ts directed to invite the attention to the above-mentioned subject and to say that some retired CP WD officials through original application (OA) No.173/2021 (Arun Kumar Goyal & others) and 2244/2019 (Lal Chand Maurya & others) OA no. 2905/2023 (Sh. Surva Kant Rai. EE(Civil) & Others) approached the CAT for seeking the benefits of grant of notional increment. These retired officials had superannuated on 30th June and 31st December and their next date of increment was due on 01st of July and 01st of January following their respective date of superannuation. The applicants were aggrieved that their pension should have been fixed by counting the increment which was due immediately following their respective date of superannuation.

2. The Hon’ble CAT(PB) New Delhi pronounced its judgement in favour of the applicants vide order dated 15.07.2021 & 22.09.2023 respectively (copy enclosed). Department of Legal Affairs, M/o Law & Justice had advised to challenge the decision dated 15.07.2021 of CAT, PB. New Delhi in High Court of Delhi. Accordingly, a Writ Petition 2926/2022 was filed in the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on 04.02.2022 after obtaining the approval of the competent authority.

3. Hon’ble High Court of Delhi issued an Order on 26.07.2023 after hearing the above Writ Petition and stated that:-

“Since we have disposed of similar writ petitions arising from the same order, we dispose of this petition stating that the parties shall be bound by the Judgement of the Supreme Court in Director (Admn. & HR) KPTCL (supra) Civil Appeal No. 2471 of 2023{[SLP (C) No.6185/2020). Petition Stands disposed of”.

4, Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of Civil Appeal No. 2471 of 2023[ SLP (C) No.6185/2020, The Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Ors. Versus C.P. Mundinamani & Ors] had announced in its Judgement dated | 1/04/2023 that*

“The Division Bench of the High Court has rightly directed the appellants to grant one annual increment which the original writ petitioners earned on the last day of their service for rendering their services preceding one year from the date of retirement with good behaviour and efficiently. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the Division Bench of the High Court. Under the circumstances, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. 1.A. No. 149091/2022 stands disposed of in terms of the above”.

5. Since the order dated 26.07.2023 of the Delhi High Court referred to the Judgement of Supreme Court (Civil Appeal No. 2471 of 2023[SLP (C) No.6185/2020) and keeping in view the vast implications of the implementation of the judgement, it was decided to refer the matter to DoPT being the Nodal Department for seeking their comments/ advice through MoHUA tor furthers order in this case.

6. DoPT in its observation stated that “The matter has been examined in this Department. It is advised that in the instant case MoHUA may, in consultation with D/o Legal Affairs, take an administrative decision regarding compliance of the Order dated 26.07.2023 of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi referred above.”

7. As per the advice of DoPT the matter was again referred to DOLA for its advice wherein DOLA advised as under:-

“Since the case at hand raises identical issue as that in the case of the KPTCL v. CP. Mundinamani, 2023 SCC Online SC 401 which has been decided in favour of the applicants by the Hon’ble Supreme court and has attained finality, it would not be a fit case for preferring an SLP against order dated 26.07.2023 passed by the Hon’ble High Court, Dethi and it is further advised that the order be implemented at the earliest so that there is no contempt proceedings initiated against the department.“

8. Accordingly, the matter was sent for the approval of Mo HUA (being the competent authority) for implementing the CAT Judgement dated 15.07.2021 & 22.09.2023. The MoHUA has approved the implementation of judgement of CAT in respect of CPWD petitioners for granting of one notional increment to the petitioners vide efile No. 9110820 dated 09/02/2024.

9. Therefore, the concerned offices of CPWD where the CPWD petitioner were posted at the time of their retirement, are advised to implement the Judgement of the CAT in its order (for OA NO. 173/2021; OA No. 2244/2019 and OA No. 2905/2023) dated 15.07.2021 & 22.09.2023 for all those CPWD officials who were party in this matter(list attached), after verification of the records of the petitioners.

10. This issues with the approval of Competent Authority.

(Kamkhanmang Palte)
Deputy Director (Admin.)-III

Copy to: (Through CPWD website)

The post Grant of notional increment as due on 1st Jan/ 1st July to the officers/ employees superannuated on 31st Dec/ 30th June and revision of pensionary benefits appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

To all PAOs for release of final pension and all pensionary benefits to retiring/retired government employees of AIR/DDn immediately

F. No: V-11013/07/2021 -BAE
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING

‘A’ Wing, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi – 01
 Date: 06.10.2022

To
Chief Controller of Accounts,
Ministry of 1&B, Shastri Bhawan,
New Delhi -110001.

Subject: Hon’ble CAT, PB, New Delhi order dated 05.07.2022 in OA No 100/2691/2021 filed by Shri Bhanwar Lal Rawal & Ors Vs Uol before Hon’ble CAT, PB, New Delhi.

Sir,

In supersession of this Ministry’s letter no V-11013/07/2018 -BAE dated 18.08.2021, approval of the Competent Authority is hereby conveyed for implementation of Hon’ble CAT PB order dated 05.07.2022 in OA No 100/2691/2021 filed by Shri Bhanwar Lal Rawal & Ors. regarding grant of final pension with all pensionary benefits to the retiring/ retired government servants.

2. However, before releasing the final pension and all pensionary benefits to the retiring/retired government servants, an undertaking may be taken from them that if any excess payment is made to an individual, then the same shall be recovered from him or her after the disposal of the WP No 9890/2019 pending before the Hon’ble High Court or any other similar litigation.

3. In view of the above, CCA, MIB may issue necessary instructions to all PAOs for release of final pension and all pensionary benefits to retiring/retired government employees of AIR/DDn immediately.

4. This matter may be accorded “Top Priority”.

Yours faithfully,
Under Secretary to the Govt. of India

Hon’ble CAT, PB, New Delhi order dated 05.07.2022 in OA No 100/2691/2021 filed by Shri Bhanwar Lal Rawal & Ors Vs Uol before Hon’ble CAT, PB, New Delhi PDF

The post Grant of final pension with all pensionary benefits to the retiring/retired government servants – Hon’ble CAT PB order appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

BSNL

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED
[A Government of India Enterprise]
Corporate Office, Taxation Section

First Floor, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan
Janpath, NewDelhi-110 002
Dated: 18.02.2020

No.48-2 / 2021-Pen (B)

To

All Heads of Circles/ Telecom Districts/ Regions/ Projects/
Telecom Stores /Telecom Factories & Other Administrative Offices
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited

Sub: Grant of annual increment falling due on the next day of superannuation/ retirement, for the purpose of pensionary benefits – Guidelines regarding.

Sir,

Of late, this Office has been receiving many Court Cases as well as letters from various Telecom Circles seeking guidelines for disposal of representations received from retired employees, regarding grant of national increment falling due on the next day of superannuation/ retirement etc. for the purpose of pensionary benefits.

2. . In this regard , I am directed to forward herewith DOP&T O.M . No. 19/2 /2018-Estt (Pay-I) dated 03/02/2021 , along with its enclosures, with regard to grant of notional increment for pensionary benefits in pursuance of the judgement dated 15/09/2017 of Hon ‘ble High Court of Madras in W. P. No. 15732 of 2017 in the case of P. Ayyamperumal Vs. Union of India & Ors.

3. DOP&T vide its aforesaid O.M has mentioned that the judgment dated 15/09/2017 of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in W.P. No. 15732 of 2017 in the case of P.Ayyamperumal Vs Union of India & Ors is in personal in nature. In this regard, a brief note reflecting the Government’s stand on the instant issue has been attached as Annexure-1.

4 . Further, it has been mentioned that in a similar case, the Hon ‘ble Supreme Court, vide judgement dated 29/03/2019, while dismissing the SLP (C) Dy. No. 6468/2019 filed by DOT against the judgement dated 03/05/2017 of Hon ‘ble High Court, Lucknow Bench in W .P. No. 484 /2010 in the matter of UOI & Ors. Vs. Sakha Ram Tripathy & Ors., has inter alia, observed the following :

” There is delay of 566 day s in filing the special leave petition. We don’t see any reason to condone the delay. The Special leave petition is dismissed on delay, keeping all the questions of law open.”

5. Since the question of law on the instant issue is open and not yet decided, the decision for implementation of the judgment dated 15/09/2017 of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in W .P. No. 15732 of 2017 in Shri P. Ayyamperumal case, in rem has not been taken.

Court cases for granting notional increment for pensionary benefits in pursuance of the judgement dated 15.09.2017 of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in W.P. No. 15732 of 2017 in the case of P. Ayyamperumal Vs Union of India

5. Accordingly, all the Telecom Circles/ Other Administrative Units/Cadre Controlling Units of BSNL Corporate Office are requested to dispose of the grievances/ representations received from various retired employees of BSNL in the light of the aforesaid guidelines issued by DOP&T. Further, where Court Cases have been filed by the retired employees in various Courts of Law, for grant of notional increment after retirement for pensionary benefits, it is, requested to defend these Courts cases in the above light and also to suitably incorporate the guidelines issued by DOP&T vide it’s O.M. dated 03/02/2021 while preparing the Counter Reply in such cases. Further, since the issue involves grant of pension and pensionary benefits, all the Telecom Circles/Administrative Units are requested to consult the concerned CCA Unit, while defending the Court Cases pertaining to their respective Circle/ Unit.

This issue with the approval of the Competent Authority .

Enclosures: As above .

Yours faithfully,

(Sudhanshu Shekhar Ray)
Asstt. General Manager (Estt)

The post Grant of annual increment falling due on the next day of superannuation/ retirement, for the purpose of pensionary benefits appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

Court Case/ Priority

F.No.2-14/ 2020-PAP
Ministry of Communications
Department of Posts
[Establishment Division/ P.A.P. Section]

Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg,
New Delhi-110001.
Dated: 01.01.2021

To

All Head of Circles

Sub: Court cases relating to grant of one Notional Increment to employees who have completed one year of service as on their retirement on Superannuation falling on 30th June of various year and further revision in Basic pension and pensionary benefits thereof.

This is regarding various court cases on the above mentioned subject filed by retired employees of this Department before various Tribunals. This section is also in receipt of representations from retired employees of the similar subject matter. Department of Personnel and Training has issued some guidelines and instructions on the subject matter, the same was circulated to all HOCs by pension section letter No 100-10/2018-Pen dated 20.01.2020.

2. In the meantime some circles have forwarded the decisions of various Tribunals for seeking further guidance for implementation of orders etc. The whole issue has been examined in the light of guidelines/ instructions issued by nodal ministry DoPT in such cases.

3. In this regard, I am directed to forward herewith copy of Department of Personnel and Training, OM 1411655/2020-Estt (Pay-IT dated 18.02.2020, requesting to defend/ challenge the cases on behalf of Union of India , keeping the observations of DoPT in view.

4. It is hence requested to defend/challenge the cases in consultation with Government Counsel, keeping the observations of DoPT in view. Individual representations/ referred cases in this regard may be addressed as per the guidelines of DoPT It is also requested to keep this Directorate apprised about further development in these cases periodically.

Also check: Notional Increment on retirement 30th June DoPT – Madras High Court Order

DA: As above

(D. Trigaths)
Assistant Director General (Estt.)

Download grant of one Notional Increment PDF

The post Court Case DoP – Grant of one Notional Increment to employees who have completed one year of service as on their retirement on Superannuation falling on 30th June of various year and further revision in Basic pension and pensionary benefits appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

BHARAT PENSIONERS’ SAMAJ
All India Federation of Pensioners’ Associations
2/13-A- LGF Backside, Jangpura – A,
New Delhi – 110014

NoBPS/SG/ Notional increment/2020/ 10

Date: 01.12.2020

The Secretary,
GOI ; Ministry of finance – Department of Revenue

The Secretary,
GOI, M/O Personnel, PG & Pensions -DOPT

Subject: Court Cases on the issue of grant of notional increment/ re-fixation of pensionary benefits as per Hon’ble Madras High Court Order in WP No .15732/2017 in the case of Sh. P. Ayyamperumal – regarding.

Reference : F. No. A-23011/36/2013-Ad.IIA Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs North Block, New Delhi, Dated the 20th November 2020.

Sir,

With reference to Prara one of F. No. A-23011/36/2013-Ad.IIA GOL, M/O finance -Department of Revenue CB of Indirect Taxes & Customs dtd 20.11.2020 ‘I am directed to refer to CBIC’s letter of even number dated 18.10.2019 (copy enclosed) on the subject mentioned above whereby you have been informed that the competent authority in consultation with Department of personnel and training and Department of Legal Affairs has decided to implement the Order dated 15.09.2017 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the matter of WP No. 15732/2017, P. Ayyamperumal Vs. Union of India, in personam and not in  rem and, therefore, it is not required to be quoted as precedent in future.

Bharat Pensioners Samaj, is of the opinion that while drafting the said Para concerned officers/ official inadvertently overlooked the following facts:

1. THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI Judgment in W.P.(C) 10509/2019 GOPAL SINGH ….. Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS OR DE R 23.01.2020 Paras 8. “” More recently, this Court in its decision dated 13th January, 2020 in W.P(C) 5539/2019 (Arun Chhibber v. Union of India) has discussed the judgment in P. Ayyamperumal at some length in the context of the prayer of an officer of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) who had retired on 30th June, 2007 for notional increment. The Court rejected the contention of the Respondents therein that the judgment in P. Ayyamperuam had to be treated as one that was in persona and not in rem.” and the fact that the SLP filed in the Supreme Court against this Delhi High Court judgment regarding notional increment vide SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 13959/2020 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 23-01-2020 in WP(C) No. 10509/2019 passed by the High Court Of Delhi ) UOI&ORS VS GOPAL SINGH is dismissed by the Honourable Supreme Court.

Grant of notional increment/ re-fixation of pensionary benefits as per Hon’ble Madras High Court Order

2,In C.L.Pasupathy v. Engineer in Chief (WRO)reported in 2009 (2) MLJ 491, Hon’ble High court of Madras has considered the expressions, “judgment ‘in rem’ & a judgment ‘in personam’ In Para 29 of the said judgment honorable court observed as follows :

“29. Courts have held that, “Judgment in rem”, operates on a thing or status rather than against the person and binds all persons to the extent of their interest in the thing, whether or not they were parties to the proceedings. The judgment “in rem”, as distinguished from judgment “in Personam” is an adjudication of some particular thing or subject matter, which is the subject of controversy, by a competent Tribunal, and having the binding effect of all persons having interests, whether or not joined as parties to the proceedings, in so far as their interests in the “res” are concerned.

In determining whether a judgment is “in rem”, the effect of the judgment is to be considered and it is tested by matters of substance, rather than by measure of any particular draft or form”

In short judgment in rem & in Personam can be defined as follows:

Judgment in rem: Judgment in rem is adjudication pronounced upon the status ofa subject matter, person or a thing by a competent court to the world generally.

Judgment in Personam: Judgments in Personam are all the ordinary judgments not affecting the status of any subject matter, any person or anything.

It is humbly submitted that the judgment dated 15.09.2017 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the matter of WP No. 15732/2017, P. Ayyamperumal Vs. Union of India squarely Fits in this definition which has been confirmed by the Honourable High Court Of Delhi through its decision dated 13th January, 2020 in W.P.(C) 5539/2019 (Arun Chhibber v. Union of India where in the Honourable court rejected the respondent’s (UOJ) contention that the judgment in P. Ayyamperuam had to be treated as one that was in persona and not in rem.”

Sir, The Democracy of our Country gives highest regards to the judicial pronouncements on their attaining legal finality and no one including DLA /DOPT has any authority to go contrary to it or misinerpret.

Madras High Court Order – Notional increment of pensionary benefits

In the end BPS beg to remind the bureaucracy of oath to Preamble to constitution of India on and request them to ensure Justice and equality in the matter of pensioners/ Sr Citizens. Not that only those who win through courts get the advantage and the other similarly placed who cannot afford to approach the court are deprived of the same benefit inspite of honorable Supreme court pronouncement not to do so.

Thanking you
Yours truly,

S C Maheswari
Secy Genl. Bharat Pensioners Samaj

The post Grant of notional increment/ re-fixation of pensionary benefits as per Hon’ble Madras High Court Order – BHARAT PENSIONERS SAMAJ appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

F. No. A-23011/36/ 2013-Ad.IIA
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs

North Block, New Delhi,
Dated the 20th November , 2020.

To

All Pr. Chief Commissioners/ Chief
Commissioners/Director General under CBIC.

Subject: Miscellaneous Representations and Court Cases on the issue of grant of notional increment /re-fixation of pensionary benefits as per Hon’ble Madras High Court Order in WP No .15732/2017 in the case of Sh. P. Ayyamperumal – regarding.

Sir/Madam,

I am directed to refer to CBIC’s letter of even number dated 18.10.2019 (copy enclosed) on the subject mentioned above whereby you have been informed that the competent authority in consultation with Department of personnel and training and Department of Legal Affairs has decided to implement the Order dated 15.09.2017 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the matter of WP No. 15732/2017, P. Ayyamperumal Vs. Union of India, in personam and not in rem and, therefore, it is not required to be quoted as precedent in future.

Notional Increment on retirement 30th June DoPT – Madras High Court Order

2. It is noted that a number of representations from similarly placed retired officers are being received in the Board. Several court cases in this regard have also been filed at various fora by the retired officers. Therefore, all the cadre controlling authorities were requested, vide letter dated 18.10.2019 referred above, that all the pending/future court cases on the similar issue should be defended/dealt with adequately on the lines as suggested by DoP&T. However, despite this, most of the cadre controlling authorities are forwarding the court cases/representations filed by the similarly placed officers to the Board for providing para-wise comments/necessary action, contrary to the instructions issued vide letter of even numb er 18.10.2019.

3. In view of above, all the Cadre Controlling Authorities are again requested to defend all the court cases and dispose all the representations on the issue of notional increment at their end and also defend all the court cases adequately on the following grounds:

I. As per Rule 10 of the CCS (RP) Rules, 2008, the date of annual increment is fixed uniformly as 1st July of every year. Employees completing six months and above in the revised pay structure as on 1st July are eligible for the next increment. The increment could not be granted to the officer retiring on 30th June, as he was not in service on 1st July.

II. DoP&T have made the following observation vide their O.M. dated 16.08.2019 and 11.11.2019:-

i. On the issue of date of retirement of government servant, FR 56(a) which inter- alia provides as under may be referred:

Except as otherwise provided in this rule, every government servant shall retire from service on the afternoon of the last day of the month in which he attains the age of sixty years:
Provided that a Government servant whose date of birth is the first of a month shall retire from service on the afternoon of the last day of the preceding month on attaining the age of sixty years.

ii. Further, so far as P. Ayyamperumal case is concerned, which has been referred in the Writ Petitions, it is stated that

a. The Hon’ble High Court judgment in P. Ayyamperumal case is in personam and is contrary to the personnel policy of Government of India.

b. Further, case of M. Balasubramaniam referred by the Hon’ble High Court in its judgment in P. Ayyamperumal case is related to the Fundamental Rules of Tamil Nadu Gernment whereas P Ayaamperumal case relates to Central Government Rules. As per provisions under Tamil Nadu Fundamental rules 26(a), the annual increments of the Govt. Servants are regulated in four quarters viz. 1st January, 1st April, 1st July and 1st October. And for the Central Govt, it is done
annually on 1st July only.

c. While adjudicating the issue whether a government servant who retires on the last day of the preceding month and whose annual increment falls due on the first of the succeeding month is entitled for sanction of annual increment for the purpose of pension and gratuity, Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in the year 2005 in C. Subba Rao case had inter alia observed the following:

In support of the above observations, the Division Bench also placed reliance on Banerjee case (supra). We are afraid, the Division Bench was not correct in coming to the conclusion that being a reward for unblemished past service, Government servant retiring on the last day of the month would also be entitled for increment even after such increment is due after retirement. We have already made reference to all Rules governing the situation. There is no warrant to come to such conclusion. Increment is given (See Article 43 of CS Regulations) as a periodical rise to a Government employee for the good behavior in the service. Such increment is possible only when the appointment is “Progressive Appointment” and it is not a universal rule. Further, as per Rule 14 of the Pension Rules, a person is entitled for pay, increment and other allowances only when he is entitled to receive pay from out of Consolidated Fund of India and continues to be in Government service. A person who retires on the last working day would not be entitled for any increment falling due on the next day and payable next day thereafter (See Article 151 of CS Regulations), because he would not answer the tests in these Rules. Reliance placed on Banerjee case (supra) is also in our considered opinion not correct because, as observed by us, Banerjee case (supra) does not deal with increment, but deals with enhancement of DA by the Central Government to pensioners. Therefore, we are not able to accept the view taken by the Division Bench. We accordingly, overrule the judgment in Malakondalah case (supra).’

Hence, there is another High Court judgment which lays contrary principles on this issue.

iii. In addition, the following observation of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi while giving its judgment dated 23.10.2018 in the case of UOI and others vs. G.C. Yadav are also noteworthy :

‘So far as the rejection of the Special Leave Petition filed by the Union of India is concerned, the same was by a summary order, and while dismissing the SLP preferred by the Union of India, the Supreme Court observed that it was not inclined to interfere with the impugned Judgment and order passed by the High Court of judicature at Madras on the facts of that case. The Supreme Court did not consider, and did not put its seal of approval on the legal principle involved in P. Ayyamperumal (supra). ‘

iv. That the Hyderabad Bench of the Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal had dismissed the OA Nos. 331/2019 and 332/2019 praying for the same relief by the applicant., vide its order dated 04.06.2019.

v. That Hon’ble CAT Madras Bench, subsequent to the judgement of Hon’ble High court of madras in P. Ayyamperumal case, vide its Orders dated 19.03.2019 in O.A. 310/00309/2019 and O.A. No. 310/00312/2019 and Order dated 27.03.2019 in O.A. No. 310/00026/2019 has dismissed the similar requests related with notional increment for pensionary benefits.

vi. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide judgment dated 29.03 .2019, while dismissing the SLP (C) Dy. No . 6468/2019 filed by D/o Telecommunications against the judgment dated 03.05.2017 of Hon’ble High Court, Lucknow Bench in WP No. 484/2010 in the matter of UoI & Ors. vs Sakha Ram Tripathy & Ors., has inter-alia observed the following:

“There is delay of 566 days in filing the special leave petition . We do not see any reason to condone the delay. The Special leave petition is dismissed on delay, keeping all the questions of law open. “

III. As far as the case of P. Ayyamperumal is concerned, it is informed that after rejection of SLP filed by Union of India in Hon’ble Apex Court, a review petition against the order dated 23.07 .2018 of Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. Ayyamperumal was filed in the Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 08.08.2019 dismissed the instant review petition. Since the apex court dismissed the review petition of the department, the competent authority decided to implement the Order dated 15.09.2017 of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in WP No. 15732/2017, directing to grant one notional increment to petitioner retiring on 30th June for the purpose of pensionary benefits in personam for petitioner only to avoid the contempt proceedings as indicated in the said letter as referred to in para I above.

IV. Department of Legal Affairs, which was also consulted, while tendering advice in the matter of P. Ayyamperumal, has cited the case of Kunhayammed and others vs State of Kerala (2000) 6 SCC 359, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has concluded the following propositions :-

“An order refusing special leave to appeal may be a non- speaking order or a speaking one. In either case it does not attract the doctrine of merger. An order refusing special leave to appeal does not stand substituted in place of the order under challenge. All that it means is that the Court was not inclined to exercise its discretion so as to allow the appeal being filed.

If the order refusing leave to appeal is a speaking order, i.e. gives reasons for refitsing the grant of leave, then the order has two implications. Firstly, the statement of law contained in the order is a declaration of law by the Supreme Court within the meaning of Article 141 of the Constitution. Secondly, other than the declaration of law, whatever is stated in the order are the findings recorded by the Supreme Court which would bind the parties thereto and also the court, tribunal or authority in any proceedings subsequent thereto by way of judicial discipline, the Supreme Court being the apex court of the country. But, this does not amount to saying that the order of the court, tribunal or authority below has stood merged in the order of the Supreme Court rejecting special leave petition or that the order of the Supreme Court is the only order binding as res judicata in subsequent proceedings between the parties. “

V. Keeping in view the above, DOLA opined that “It is very clear that the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Madras passed in the matter of Sh. P. Ayyamperumal is in personam and not in m, therefore, the Administrative Department may implement the order in personam.”

Madras High Court Order – Notional increment of pensionary benefits

VI. Referring to the above principles laid down in Kunhayamrned (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court subsequently in the case of Bhakra Beas Management Board v. Krishan Kumar Vij and Anr. (2010) 8 SCC 701, held as under:-

“Thus, according to the law laid down by the Bench of three learned Judges of this Court, it is clear that dismissal of a matter by this Court at the threshold, with non­ speaking order, would not fall in the category of binding precedent. Meaning thereby that the impugned order of the Division Bench can still be challenged on merits by the appellant Board. Thus, the earlier orders of the High Court and this Court passed in Raninder Singh Patpatias case, creates no bar from re-examining the matter on merits.”

VII. From the above, it is clear that doctrine of merger is not applicable to in limine dismissal of SLP by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and would not attract the provisions of Article 141 of the Constitution of India to the said order.

4. In view of above, it is again requested that all the pending/ future court cases/representation on the similar issue should be defended/ dealt with adequately on the above lines on behalf of all the respondents in terms of Board’s instruction issued vide letter F.No. C-18012/6/ 2013-Ad.IIB dated 09.05.2016. Reference to the Board should be made only if any additional policy issue is involved.

Encl: As above.

Yours faithfully,
(Rajendra Kumar)
Deputy Secretary to the Government of India

The post Grant of notional increment/ re-fixation of pensionary benefits as per Hon’ble Madras High Court Order appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

F.No.14(02)/2019/ D(Pen/Pol)
Government of India
Ministry of Defence
Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare
D(Pension/Policy)

Room No.222, ‘B’ Wing,
Sena Bhawan, New Delhi-110011.
Dated: 5th October, 2020

To,

The Chief of the Army Staff
The Chief of the Naval Staff
The Chief of the Air Staff

Sub: Revision of Regulation relating to rate of Family Pension (Normal rate & Enhanced rate) of Pension Regulation for the Army, Part-I (2008) in the line of amendment done in Sub Rule (3) of Rule 54 of CCS Pension Rule, 1972 by DoP&PW-reg.

Sir,

The undersigned is directed to refer to the provision of Note 3 (i) & (ii) below Army Instruction 51/80 and Regulation 64 (b) in Pension Regulation for Army, Part-I (2008) under which the minimum of 7 years of continuous qualifying service is required for grant of enhanced rate of Family Pension for the Armed Forces personnel.

2. Consequent upon issue of Gazette Notification No. 550 dated 19.09.2019 of the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare (DoP&PW), the condition of minimum requirement of 7 years of continuous service for grant of enhanced rate of Ordinary Family Pension in the sub rule (3)(a) & (b) of Rule 54 of CCS Pension Rule, 1972 has been deleted w.e.f 1st October, 2019 and now Government servants who died in service/ invalided out even with less than 7 years of qualifying service shall be eligible for enhanced rate of Family Pension. This notification also has a provision where a Government servant who died within ten years before the 1* day of October 2019 without completing continuous service of seven years, his family shall be eligible for family pension at enhanced rates in accordance with sub rule (3) with effect from the 1° day of October 2019, subject to fulfillment of other conditions for grant of family pension.

3, . Now, the President is pleased to decide that the same provision shall be extended to Armed Forces Personnel also. Accordingly, the clause “after having rendered not less than 7 years continuous qualifying service” of Regulation 64{b) of Pension Regulations for the Army, Part-I (2008) stands deleted w.e.f. 01.10.2019.

Also check: Provision of Invalid Pension to Armed Forces Personnel before completion of 10 years of qualifying service

4. It has also been decided that where an Armed Forces Personnel died within ten years before the 1° October, 2019 without completing continuous service of seven years, his family shall be eligible for ordinary family pension at enhanced rate as per Regulations 64(b) of Pension Regulations for the Army Part-I (2008) with effect from the 1st October 2019 subject to fulfillment of other conditions for grant of Ordinary Family Pension.

5. Further, the provision of Army Instruction No. 51/1980 would stand modified upto this extent w.e.f. 01.10.2019. The regulation and their instructions for grant of Ordinary Family Pension in Navy and Air Force shall also be amended accordingly.

6. This issues with the concurrence of the Finance Division of this Ministry vide their ID No. 10(02)/2020/FIN/ PEN dated 23.09.2020.

Also check: Pay Scales for PBORs of Armed Forces

7. Hindi Version will follow.

Yours faithfully,

Ashok Kumar
Under Secretary to the Govt. of India

The post Minimum 7 years of continuous qualifying service is required for grant of enhanced rate of Family Pension for the Armed Forces personnel appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

Charter of Demands (Important Points) including

• Scrap NPS, Scrap the draconian FR 56(j) and Rule 48,
• Withdraw DA and DR freezing orders,
• Appoint 8th Central Pay Commission and revise the Pay, Allowances and Pensionary benefits,
• Increase 7th CPC minimum pay and fitment formula,
• Withdraw “Very Good” bench mark for MACP,
• Stop ban on creation of new posts,
• Stop Corporatisation and privatisation of Railways,
• Defence and Postal Departments,
• Grant equal pay for equal work for all,
• Merger of DA

REVISED CHARTER OF DEMANDS

(Submitted for approval of the National Executive Committee meeting to be held on 26-09-2020)

1. Scrap New Contributory Pension Scheme (NPS). Restore old defined benefit Pension Scheme (OPS) to all employees. Guarantee 50% of the last pay drawn as minimum pension.

2. (a) Scrap the draconian FR 56(j) and Rule 48 of CCS (Pension) Rules 1972. Stop terrorizing and victimizing employees.

(b) Withdraw the attack against the recognised status of Associations and Federations.

(c) Withdraw the anti-worker Wage/Labour codes and other anti-labour reforms.

(d) Stop attack on trade union rights.

3. (a) Withdraw the orders freezing the DA and DR of employees and Pensioners and impounding of arrears till 30.0-.2021.

(b) Implement five year wage revision and Pension revision to Central Government employees and Pensioners. Appoint 8th Central Pay Commission and revise the Pay, Allowances and Pensionary benefits of Central Government employees and Pensioners with effect from 01-01-2021.

(c) Honour the assurance given by Group of Ministers (GoM) to NJCA leaders on 30-06-2016. Increase minimum pay and fitment formula recommended by 7th CPC. Grant HRA arrears from 01-01-2016.

(d) Withdraw “Very Good” bench mark for MACP, grant promotional heirachy and date of effect of MACP from 01-01-2006.

Also check: MACP ON PROMOTIONAL HIERARCHY – MACP Supreme Court Order – Heard & Reserved 

(e) Grant Option-1 parity recommended by 7th CPC to all Central Govt. Pensioners. Grant one national increment to those who retired on 30th june.

(f) settle all anomalies arising out of 7th CPC implementation.

4. Stop ban on creation of new posts. Fill up all seven lakhs vacant posts in Central Government departments in time bound manner. Scrap National Recruitment Agency and introduce Department wise recruitment and Regional recruitment for Group B and C posts. Stop re-engaging retire personnel in Central Govt. services.

5. Stop Corporatisation and privatisation of Railways, Defence and Postal Departments. Withdraw closure/ merger orders of Govt. of India Printing Presses and Postal Stores depots/ Postal Stamp depots. Stop proposed move to close down salt department. Stop outsourcing and closure of Govt. establishments.

Also check: Merger of Dearness Allowance with the Basic Pay w.e.f. April 1, 2004

6. (a) Regularisation of Gramin Dak Sevaks and grant of Civil Servants status. Implement remaining positive recommendations of Kamalesh Chandra Committee Report.

(b) Regularise all casual and contract workers including those joined service on or after 01-09-1993.

7. Settle all Covid-9 related issues pertaining to Central Govt. employees and Pensioners on top priority basis. Treat the period of absence during lock down as duty. Grant full wages to casual, part-time, contingent contract workers during the lockdown period.

8. Grant equal pay for equal work for all. Remove disparity in pay scales between Central Secretariat staff and similarly placed staff working in field units of various departments.

9. Implement 7th CPC wage revision and pension revision to remaining Autonomous body employees and pensioners. Ensure payment of full arrears without further delay. Grant Bonus to Autonomous body employees pending from 2016-17 onwards.

10. Remove arbitrary 5% ceiling imposed on compassionate appointments. Grant appointment in all eligible cases.

11. Grant five time-bound promotions to Group B & C employees. Complete cadre review in all departments in a time bound manner.

12. Ensure prompt functioning of various negotiating forums under the JCM Scheme at all levels.

Source: confederation

The post Appoint 8th Central Pay Commission and revise the Pay, Allowances and Pensionary benefits – REVISED CHARTER OF DEMANDS appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

Based on the recommendations of the Vth Pay Commission, the Government has abolished the standard pension of the rank. The normal retiring pension is purely based on two factors i.e. Qualifying Service and Average Monthly Emoluments.

Type of Benefits
If the minimum qualifying service required has been completed officers are eligible for

• Retiring Pension
• Retirement Gratuity

Minimum Qualifying Service
In case officers have not rendered the minimum qualifying service for pension, then they are entitled to

• Retiring Gratuity
• Retirement Gratuity

Qualifying Service
It shall mean the actual qualifying service rendered plus a weightage (in years) appropriate to the last rank held (as given subsequently below). The minimum qualifying service (without weightage) to be eligible for retiring pension is 20 years (15 years in case of a late entrant). The maximum qualifying service including weightage reckonable for pensionary benefits is 33 years.

Counting of Other Service
Full pre-commissioned service rendered under the Central Government whether in a Civil Department or in the Armed Forces shall be taken in account while working out the Qualifying service for pensionary benefits and determining the minimum Qualifying service for retiring pension.

Calculation of Fraction of Year for Qualifying Service
To calculate the length of the Qualifying service, fraction of a year equal to 3 months and above but less than 6 months shall be treated as a completed one half year and reckoned as Qualifying service.

Weightage
The object of the weightage for calculating the Retiring Pension is to give the benefit of entitlement to Retiring pension as close as possible to 50% of reckonable emoluments which is the maximum admissible after 33 years of service. The weightage allowed is as follows

Reckonable Emoluments
For the purpose of working out the Retiring Pension the term Reckonable Emoluments means the average of the Pay. Dearness Pay, Non-practising Allowance and the Rank pay and Stagnation Pay, if any, drawn during the 10 months immediately preceding the date of retirement.

Quantum of Retiring Pension

• The retiring pension is calculated at 50% of average emoluments. The amount so determined is the retiring pension for 33 years of reckonable qualifying service. For lesser period of reckonable qualifying service, this amount is proportionately reduced. The minimum pension shall not be less than Rupee 1,275/- per month wef 01 Jan 1996.
  
• Further with effect from 01 Apr 2004, since 50% of Dearness Allowance converted into Dearness Pay is counted for retirement benefits, pension/ family pension shall be calculated at 50% and 30% respectively of the pay plus Dearness Pay subject to minimum of Rupee 1,913/- and maximum of 50% and 30% respectively of the highest pay plus Dearness Pay in the Government. The highest pay in the Govt wef 01 Jan 96 is Rupee 30,000/-. The highest pension, as of now, comes to Rupee 22,500/- (i.e. basic pension Rupee 15,000/- + dearness pay Rupee 7,500/- = total pension Rupee 22,500/-).

Protection of Retiring Pension
Retiring Pension in the rank of Cdr, Commodore (Captain with 3 years and 10 months, or more service) and Rear Admiral shall in NO CASE be less than the pension admissible to the officer as a Lt Cdr, Captain (with less than 3 years and 10 months service) or as a Commodore, as the case may be, had the officer not been promoted to the higher rank.

Retirement/ Retiring Gratuity
Please see the details in Chapter IV on Gratuity.

Pension Disbursing Authorities
The officers may claim the pension through Govt. Treasury/ Pension Payment Masters/ Defence Pension Disbursing Officers. They may also draw the pension through Public Sector Banks, if they so desire. With effect from 09 Jul 05, pensioners can operate the joint account of pension with his/her spouse.

Illustration
An illustration showing the procedure for calculation of Retiring Pension is given at appendix H. For a near exact amount of pension and gratuity, officers are advised to browse the NPO website https://www.navpay.gov.in

The post Central Government Employees Pensionary Benefits – Retirement and Pension – Officers – NAVY appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.