Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

1997 DIGILAW 404 (SC)

Union Of India v. Jagdishwar Bhat

1997-02-24

G.B.PATTANAIK, G.N.RAY

body1997
(1) LEAVE granted. (2) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. (3) THE short question which arises for our consideration is whether the respondent who is a retired Medical Officer of the Railway is entitled to complimentary passes. Such claim of the respondent was not accepted by the Railway Administration on the ground that the rules relating to grant of complimentary passes after superannuation require that the employee concerned has rendered minimum 20 years of actual service. Admittedly, the respondent has not rendered 20 years actual service. The respondent has been given the benefit of superannuation pension by extending the length of service on the basis of Rule 2423-A (CSR 404-B). It appears to us that the a benefit of such rule for superannuation pension is confined to cases of superannuation pension and not for the purpose of extending the period of actual service for getting complimentary passes after retirement on superannuation. (4) THE contention of the learned counsel for the respondent is that if in the case of voluntary retirement, the benefit of extension of five years service is given for the purpose of issuing complimentary passes, such benefit ought to be given to the person who has retired on attaining the age of superannuation and the rule discriminating between an employee retiring on superannuation and an employee retiring voluntarily in the matter of eligibility of getting complimentary passes after retirement offends Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and must be struck down for such discrimination. In our view, there is no question of discrimination because an employee voluntarily retired and one retired on superannuation are not similarly circumstanced. The person who has retired on attaining the age of superannuation has been treated separately and for him benefits have been given by way of superannuation pension by notionally extending the period of service as already indicated. Such benefit of pension has not been given to an employee voluntarily retired. Since an employee retired on superannuation and an employee voluntarily retired are not similarly circumstanced, the different rule, if any, for complimentary pass after retirement cannot be held to be discriminatory so that the rule requires to be struck down. We, therefore, allow this appeal and set aside the order passed by the tribunal.