Re-employed person can receive DA on pension as well as salary: Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal
Nagpur: The Nagpur bench of Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT)
held that a re-employed pensioner was entitled for receiving "dearness allowance (DA)" on his pension as well as on his salary.
"There is no rule that prohibits claiming dearness allowance on pension
amount as well as on basic salary that is received after re-employment.
The intention of legislation was to give benefit to the government
employee who prefers retirement before the age of 55 years and is
obviously subjected to payment of reduced amount as pension as compared
to those who superannuate at 58 years," Justice (retired) MN Gilani
stated.
Applicant Mohammed Jameel had sought voluntary retirement from the
Public Health Department on October 5, 1999, before attaining 55 years
and joined as a lecturer in Law College in Gondia from the next day. He
retired on February 9, 2007, after putting in seven years of teaching.
On the same day, city-based district treasury officer issued an order of
recovery of Rs1.31 lakh from his pension amount on the grounds that
drawing "two dearness allowances" was not permitted. The petitioner
received the DA on his pension as well as on his salary during his
re-employment.
He challenged this order through counsel Tushar Mandlekar relying on the
MCS Pension Rules that say in case of persons retiring before attaining
the age of 55 years, the competent authority while fixing the pay
should ignore the "entire pension" clause in case of employees other
than Class I. The government relied on the guidelines issued through its
circulars for pointing out that excess DA payment was not permissible.
Mandlekar argued the definition of "pension" as per Article 366 of the
Constitution of India was inclusive of DA. The definition of pay,
pension, and pensionable pay, are defined under Rule 9 (36), (37), (38),
and Rule 60 of MCS, if read together along with the definition of
pension under Article 366, makes it clear that DA was included in pay
and pension, and thus could not be separated or deducted independently.
The tribunal held that Rule 157 (3) of MCS Pension Rules was independent
and had its own identity, which mandated the government to ignore the
"entire pension" clause that included allowances attached to it.
MAT added that there was no reason for paying and disbursing officer to
rely on Rule 262 of Maharashtra Treasury Rules 1968 or government
circulars. "The payment of pension to the re-employed pensioners is
required to be fixed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter XIV of
MCS Pension Rules, 1982. It is provided in Rule 157 (3) that "entire
pension" needs to be ignored while fixing the new pay," Justice Gilani
said before quashing the district treasury officer order.
Read at: Times of India
0 comments:
Post a Comment