Holding

The additional relief under the 2 December 1989 order is not available to pre‑1 September 1986 pensioners whose consolidated pension is below Rs 300.

Summary

The Supreme Court examined two government orders concerning pensions of State of Rajasthan employees who retired before 1 September 1986. The 1987 order guaranteed a minimum monthly pension of Rs 300, inclusive of original pension and temporary increases. A later 1989 order provided additional relief ranging from Rs 50 to Rs 175, varying with the date of retirement. The question before the Court was whether every pre‑1 September 1986 pensioner, who already received the Rs 300 minimum, was also entitled to the further amount of Rs 75 envisaged in the 1989 order. Relying on the calculation sheets submitted by the State, the Court held that the additional relief could not be granted to those whose consolidated pension, even after the 1989 increase, would remain below Rs 300, as this would defeat the purpose of the minimum‑pension guarantee. Consequently, the High Court’s view that all such pensioners were entitled to the extra relief was modified, and the State’s appeal was allowed. No costs were awarded.

Issues considered

Whether the additional relief under the Government Order dated 2 December 1989 is payable to all pre‑1 September 1986 pensioners who already receive the minimum pension of Rs 300 per month.

Subjects

Service lawPensionMinimum pensionAdditional reliefGovernment orderEntitlementRajasthan

Judgment

STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. A
v.
>·) NOOR BANO ETC. ETC.

APRIL 17, 1995

[K RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.] B

Service Law :

Pensioir-State Government-Order-Grant of minimum and family
pension to pre-1.9.1986 pensioners-Subsequent order granting additional C
relief to pensioners-Extent of entitlement under subsequent order-Held
benefit of subsequent order was not available to pensioners whose con-
solidated pension was below Rs. 300.

An order dated 20th October, 1987 issued by the State of Rajasthan
regarding grant of a minimum and family pension to pre-1.9.1986 State D
Government pensioners provided that pension admissible to the pen-
sioners would not be less than Rs. 300 pre month including original
_/
; pension plus 'temporary increases In pension' and ~ncreases In pension'.
A subsequent order dated December 2, 1989 granted additional relief
which varied from Rs. 50 to 175, to the aforesaid class of pensioners E
stating that the additional relief should be admissible to pre-1.9.86
pensioners at such rate which would depend upon the date of their
retirement. On the extent of entitlement of pre-1.9.86 pensioners under
the order dated December 2, 1989 the High Court of Rajasthan held that
all the pensioners would be entitled to additional relief. In State's appeal F
to this court on the question whether In case of those pre 1.9.86
pensioners, who were to receive as per the order of October 20, 1987
minimum of Rs. 300, a further sum of 75 visualised by the second or~
bas to be paid In all cases:

Allowing the State's appeal and modifying the High Court's order, G
this Court

HELD : The additional relief visualised by the Government order
of December 2,1989 would not be availabl~ those pre 1.9.86 pensioners
.whose consolidated pension is below Rs. 300. [311-D] H
309
310 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] 3 S.C.R.

A CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 5167 of
1995 Etc. Etc. ·
\ .
From the Judgment and Order dated 2.3.93 of the Rajasthan High
Court in S.B.C. W.P. No. 1330 of 1993.

B Aruneshwar Gupta for the Appellants.

B.D. Sharma for the Respondents.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

c HANSARIA, J. Leave granted. Heard counsel on both sides. The
short but important question which needs to be decided in these appeals
is regarding the extent of entitlement of "pre-01.09.1986 pensioner" in the
State of Rajasthan under Government Order of even number dated
02.12.1989.
D
2. To decide the aforesaid question we need first to note the Govern-
ment Order of October 20, 1987 on the subject of grant of minimum
pension and family pension to pre·Ol.09.1986 State Government's pen- \.
sioners. This order states that the pension admissible to the just mentioned
class of pensioners "taken together" would not be less than Rs. 300 per
E month. This amount has been said in the order to include original pension
plus 'temporary increases in pension' and 'increases in pension'. Then came
the order of December 2, 1989 on the subject of grant of additional relief
to the aforesaid class of pensioners. It states, inter alia, that the additional
relief shall be admissible to the pre-01.09.1986 pensioners at such rate
4'
F which would depend upon the date of their retirement. The amount of
additional relief varies from Rs. 50 to Rs. 175. May we state that in the
present appeals we are not· concerned about the reasonableness of the
classification based on the dates of retirement. All that we have been called
upon to decide is whether in case of those pre-01-09-1986 pensioners, who
G were to receive as per the order of October 20, 1987 minimum of Rs. 300,
a further sum of Rs. 75 visualised by the second order has to be paid in all
cases.

3. The view taken by the High Court of Rajasthan in the impugned
judgment is that all the above pensioners would be entitle to additional
H relief. The State has preferred ibis appeal by special leaves.
STATEOFRAJ.v. N.BANO[HANSARIA,J.] 311

4. The learned State counsel has put on record, alongwith his written A .
submission, not only the relevant orders issued from time to time by the
State Government, but.calculation charts also in the annexures. Annexure
'A' deals with those pre-01.09.1986 pensioners who retired prior to
01.09.1976. Of these retirees, the consolidated pension of the first four
categories, even after including additional relief of 15% which was granted B
by the order of December 2,1989, varies from Rs. 254 to Rs.286.50. The
pension to admissible to them by virtue of the Government Order of
October 20, 1987 would, however, be Rs. 300. If thesr retirees have to be
given a further sum of Rs.75, as is the contention on behalf of the respon-
dents, the amount of consolidated pension they would get would exceed
that which other categories of such retirees would get, inasmuch as the C
consolidated pension of the latter category varies from Rs, 301.50 to Rs.
lCl'.IQ. It is apparent that such a consequence was not desired by the order
. of December 2, 1989 nor can such a consequence be allowed to happen.

5. We, therefore, hold that the additional relief visualised by the
Government Order of December 2, 1989 would not be available to those D
pre-01.09.1986 pensioners whose consolidated pension is below to Rs. 300,
beyond that reflected Annexure 'A', or for that in Annexure 'B'. To put
the matter beyond doubt, we observe that the first four categories of
Government employees, about whom mention has been made in Anm:xure
'A' and first five mentioned in Annexure 'B' would not receive, even by the E
force of the Government Order of December 2, 1989, anything beyond Rs.
300.

6. The view taken by the High Court is modified as stated above and
the appeals stand allowed accordingly. In the facts and circumstances of
_J the case, we make no order as to costs. F

T.NA Appeal Allowed.

-)