D S Yadav vs Union Of India And Others

MA 451/2016

By way of the instant application, the applicant seeks condonation of delay of 6793 days in filing the present O.A. In view of the law laid down by the

Hon ble Supreme Court in the matter of Union of India and Ors. Vs. Tarsem Singh (2009) (1) AISLJ 371, delay in filing the OA is condoned.

OA 619/2016

Aggrieved by grant of service pension in E Group as per Table 37 as per PCDA (Pension) Allahabad Circular No.430 dated 10.03.2010 and No.

478 dated 13.02.2012, only with effect from 01.07.2009 (and not w.e.f. 10.10.1997 as claimed by him), the applicant, Ex Nb Subedar (Driver MMT)

who has been discharged from service on 01.10,1994 under Army Rule 13(3) items-1(i) (a) has filed this OA with a prayer that he be granted service

pension at the new rates in 'Y Group instead of E' Group (Table No.35) as Driver MT Trade for the period from 10.10.1997 to 30.06.2009 also, in

keeping with contents of PCDA

(Pension) Allahabad Circular Nos. 430 dated 10thMarch. 2010 and 478 dated 13.02.2012.

2 The facts germane to the case are that, the applicant was enrolled in the Indian Army (Corps of Signals) on 13.09.1968 as Driver MT trade and

discharged from service w.e.f. 01.10.1994 after fulfilling the terms and conditions in the rank of Nb Subedar (Drivder MT). Further, on

implementation of recommendations of the 5' Central Pay Commission (CPC) vide Special Army Instruction SAI 1/S/97, the pay scale of personnel

below officer rank (PBOR) was revised w.e.f. 01.01.1996, and subsequently revised again w.e.f. 10.10.1997. Regrouping was done for various

groups of PBOR, whereby Driver MT trade was equated from Group E to Group Y w.e.f. 10.10.1997. Since the applicant is a pre 10. 10.1997

pensioner, he claims that he should be equated with post 10.10.1997 pensioner in keeping with contents of Para 1.1 of Got. MoD letter dated

08.03.2010. However. according to PCDA (P) Allahabad Circular No.430 dated 10.03.2010 revision of pension as per Gol (MoD) letter No PC 10

(1)/2009-D (Pen/Pol) dated 08.03.2010 is to take effect from 01.07.2009. Thus. the applicant has been paid pension only as per 'E' Group (Table

No.35) as ''Driver MT'' trade w.e.f. 10.10.1997 to 30.06.2009 which was incorrect and he contends that he is entitled to fix his pension in 'Y Group as

Nb Sub. (Driver MT) as per Table No.32 and to get the arrears as per PCDA (Pension) Allahabad Circular Nos. 430 dated 10.03.2010 and 478 dated

13.02.2012 and any other circulars in this regard issued later.

3 Heard the learned counsels for both sides and perused the pleadings and documents on record.

Learned Counsel for the applicant avers that the applicant has received pension in 'E. Group (Table No.35) as Driver MT.. trade w.e.f. 10.10.1997

to 30.06.2009 whereas he should have been paid pension as per Table 32 in 'Y. Group for that period on the same lines as he has been paid for the

period thereafter w.e.f. 1. 07.2009.

5 Learned counsel for the Respondents however. controverts the arguments made on behalf of the applicant. Counsel states that Para 7.3 of PCDA

(P) Allahabad Circular No.478 dated 13.02.2012 is applicable only in certain trades mentioned in the said circular. PBOR of Army who were

discharged on or after 10.10.1997, while serving in mentioned trades in Group E' have been regrouped in Group 'Y' w.e.f. 10 10.1997. Counsel

contents that though the applicant seeks pension in Group 'Y w.e.f. 10.10.1997 it is not possible to grant the same since, as per Para 3 of Circular No

430 of 10 03.2010, the revision of pension was to take effect from 01.07.2009. Further, Para 10.1 of the same Circular clearly states that no arrears

on account of revision of pension will be admissible for the period prior to 01.07 2009. Thus no arrears can be paid for the period from 10.10.1997 upto

30.06.2009 as sought by the applicant.

CONCLUSION

6 We have given careful consideration to the arguments on both sides as well as the written pleadings and documents placed before us. We find that

the issue before us is whether the pension benefit accruing to the applicant, a pre 10.10.1997 pensioner. from regrouping of PBOR trades

implemented as part of 5""' CPC viz. Group 'Y replacing Group 'E' for Driver MT trade. should take effect w.e.f.01.07.2009 as done in this case by

respondents, or should it be implemented w.e.f. 10.10.1997, as claimed by the applicant.

We find that the applicant, being from the Driver MT trade, was regrouped from Group E to Group Y w.e.f. 10.10.1997 as clarified in PCDA (P)

Allahabad Circular No 478 dated 13.02.2012 and Para 2 of PCDA (P) Allahabad Circular No.512 dated 26.06.2013. The respondents have not

provided any cogent reason as to why pension in Group 'Y' was not given to the applicant w.e.f. 10.10.1997 despite acceptance by them that he was

regrouped in Group .y: on that date. Therefore, we find that there is no basis for not granting pension of Group 'Y to the applicant w.e.f. 10.10.1997

This Tribunal has decided a similar case, OA 397/2016. Ex-Sub (Driver MT) Ram Phal Vs. Union of India, in favour of the applicant vide order dated

16.01.2019.

8 In the result, the OA bears merit and is allowed. Respondents to calculate and pay arrears of service pension as per Table 37 for Driver MT in

Group • y. in respect of the applicant for the period from 10 10 1997 to 30.06.2009. Arrears to be paid within six months, otherwise it will attract

interest at the rate of 8 percent per annum. No order as to costs.

Pronounced in open court on the 9th day of August. 2019.