The recent court ruling delves into the intricate legal analysis surrounding pay fixation for retired Armed Forces personnel upon re-employment in government service. The judgment sheds light on the interpretation of relevant regulations and the application of statutory provisions. Let’s explore the key insights from the court’s deliberation on this crucial matter.
Facts
- The High Court heavily relied on the decision of the Division Bench in the case of Government of India & Ors. Vs. Captain (Retd.) Kapil Chaudhary in Writ Petition (C) No.2331 of 2012.
- The High Court allowed the writ petition and directed the reworking of pay fixation for the original writ petitioner, stating that upon reappointment in government service, the retired Armed Force Personnel would be entitled to have their basic pay fixed at par with their last drawn pay.
- The Union of India and others have appealed against the High Court’s decision in Writ Petition (C) No.2135 of 2020, which granted the same entitlement to a retired Army Force Personnel upon re-appointment in government service.
- The original writ petitioner claimed entitlement to basic pay at par with last drawn pay
- Claimed protection of pay as per Para 8 of the CCS Order
- Representation made by petitioner was rejected on 24.04.2019
- Petitioner was a Major in the Indian Army, discharged on 15.07.2007
- Appointed as an Assistant Commandant in the CRPF with lower pay scale
Also Read: Ruling on Circumstantial Evidence in Murder Case
Issue
- The key issue before the Court is whether upon re-employment in government service, an employee previously serving in the Indian Army/Armed Forces is entitled to pay scales at par with their last drawn pay.
- Para 8 of the CCS Order is relevant to this question, stating the conditions for pay scale entitlement upon re-employment.
Also Read: Challenging Legal Presumptions in Negotiable Instrument Cases
Arguments
- Appellant, a Major in the Indian Army, contends that his pay on re-employment should be fixed at the last drawn pay in the Army.
- Union of India disputes, stating pay should be fixed at the pay received in the re-employed position as per Para 8 of CCS Orders.
- Despite receiving increments based on Army service years, pay fixation should be based on re-employed position’s pay scale.
- Respondent was appointed as Assistant Commandant with a lower grade pay, in accordance with CCS Order.
- Para 8 of CCS Order does not mention retaining last drawn pay, but focuses on advancing increments based on Army service years.
- Allowing respondent’s claim would violate the statutory provision of Para 8 of the CCS Order.
- The High Court correctly interpreted Para 8 of the CCS Order stating that the respondent should receive the pay scale as per his last drawn salary in the Indian Army.
- The respondent’s grade pay was fixed at Rs. 5400 instead of Rs. 6600, which was lower than what he was receiving in the Indian Army.
Also Read: Legal Analysis of Admission Irregularities in Educational Institutions
Analysis
- Pay fixation of the respondent in government service was in compliance with para 8 of CCS Order 1986.
- Emergency Commissioned Officers and Short Service Commissioned Officers in the Armed Forces are entitled to advance increments based on completed years of service in the Armed Forces.
- The pay in civil posts should not exceed the last drawn pay in the Armed Forces, as per para 8 of the CCS Order.
- Grade pay for civil post is considered in pay computation, with no entitlement to pay protection based on last drawn pay in the Armed Forces.
- The computed pay for the respondent in the civil post did not exceed the pay last drawn in the Armed Forces and was just and proper.
- Interpretation of Para 8 indicates entitlement to advance increments based on service, not a pay equal to last drawn pay in Armed Forces.
- Reference to last drawn pay in Armed Forces is to ensure that the pay in the civil post does not exceed the last drawn pay.
- Para 8 of the CCS Order does not entitle retired Armed Force personnel to have their basic pay fixed at par with their last drawn pay upon re-employment in Government Services.
- The High Court made a grave error by stating that retired Armed Forces personnel on re-appointment would be entitled to their last drawn pay as Armed Forces personnel.
- The High Court’s judgment is unsustainable and contrary to para 8 of the CCS Order, 1986.
- The appeal succeeds due to these reasons.
Decision
- The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court have been quashed and set aside.
- Consequently, the writ petition filed by the respondent before the High Court has been dismissed.
Case Title: UNION OF INDIA Vs. ANIL PRASAD (2022 INSC 620)
Case Number: C.A. No.-004073-004073 / 2022
