Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 583 (MP)

P. S. Pandya v. State of M. P.

2005-05-04

ARUN MISHRA

body2005
ORDER Arun Mishra, J. 1. Petitioner in this writ petition has prayed for the relief that the petitioner is not governed by All India Service (Commutation of Pensions) Regulations, 1959 for commutation of pension facility and hence M. P. Rules, 1976 applies to the petitioner which provides facility of restoration of commuted pension after reaching the age of 70 years. 2. It is averred in the petition that the State Government in exercise of the powers conferred as per proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India framed "Madhya Pradesh Civil Pensions (Commutation) Rules, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as "M. P. Rules, 1976"). Petitioner has prayed for the relief in terms of the M. P. Rules, 1976. An order was issued in the year 1985. Pension was restored w.e.f. 1st July, 1985. Petitioner reached the age of 70 years on 26-6-1996. He therefore filled the form of application for restoration of commuted pension on 12-7-1996. Pension was restored on completion of 70 years as per order (P/2) dt. 18-6-1996. Order was issued after due sanction from the department of Finance. Order (P/2) was withdrawn by respondent No. 3 on 20-8-1996 on the ground that the petitioner had not completed 15 years from the date of order of commutation pension i.e. 29-3-1985 and he shall be completing 15 years on 28-3-2000. Accordingly the pension was again reduced. Hence, writ petition has been filed. 3. It is further averred that M. P. District and Sessions Judges (Death-Cum-Retirement) Rules, 1964 were framed in exercise of power conferred by proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India by the State Government where by All India Services (Death-Cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1958 were made applicable mutatis mutandis to all permanent District and Sessions Judges. Some of the District Judges were granted the benefit of restoration of pension after reaching the age of 70 years. The names have been mentioned in the list (P/6). Commutation is only a facility not a benefit. Hence, M. P. Rules are applicable for commutation not the All India Services (Commutation of Pensions) Regulation 1959. 4. Some of the District Judges were granted the benefit of restoration of pension after reaching the age of 70 years. The names have been mentioned in the list (P/6). Commutation is only a facility not a benefit. Hence, M. P. Rules are applicable for commutation not the All India Services (Commutation of Pensions) Regulation 1959. 4. In the return filed by the respondents No. 1 and 3, it is contended that the pension was sanctioned by the Accountant General, M. P. Gwalior under the All India Services (Death-Cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1958, not under the M. P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976, as apparent from order (R/l) issued by the Accountant General, M. P. Gwalior on 22nd April, 1997. Rules, 1958 are applicable as per Rules, 1964 framed by the State of M. P. for District and Sessions Judge. Respondents have sanctioned the pension under the All India Services (Death-Cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1958 and l/3rd portion of the same has been commuted as per provisions of the All India Service (Commutation of Pension) Regulation 1959. Thus, the M. P. Rules of 1976 are not applicable. 5. In the additional return, it is contended that as per the central commutation rules, pension can be restored after 15 years not before death. Recovery against other 8 persons has already been ordered by the Director, Treasury and Accounts. 6. Shri D. K. Dixit, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the pension was rightly restored to full as per order (P/2) in the year 1985. It is submitted that M. P. Rules of 1976 are applicable. Commutation is only a facility not a benefit. Thus, the rules of 1958 and regulation of 1959 are not applicable. 7. Shri Jaideep Singh, Dy. GA learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents No. 1 and 3 contended that as per the M. P. District and Sessions Judges (Death-Cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1964, rules of All India Services (Death-Cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1958 and regulation framed thereunder are applicable. Pension is paid under rules of 1958, commutation are made under regulation 1959, as per the provisions made under the Rules, 1964, hence, no interference is called for. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, in my opinion, petition has no merit. Pension is paid under rules of 1958, commutation are made under regulation 1959, as per the provisions made under the Rules, 1964, hence, no interference is called for. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, in my opinion, petition has no merit. Rule 2 of M. P. District and Sessions Judges (Death-cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1964 makes it clear that All India Services (Death-Cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1958 are applicable mutatis mutandis. It is not dispute that the pension has been sanctioned under the AIS DCRB Rules, 1958. Commutation of l/3rd pension was ordered following the principles laid down under the regulations of 1959 as they have been made applicable as per the Rules, 1964. Consequently, M. P. Rules of 1976 are not applicable. Pension could only be restored in terms of Government of India Circular dt. 5-3-1987 which provides that Central Government pensioner who got of their pension commuted on 1-4-1985 or thereafter have completed or will complete 15 years from date of commutation from as their respective date of retirement will have commuted pension restored. The period prescribed for restoration of full pension is 15 years, thus, the petitioner was not entitled for restoration of pension as per order (P/2) dt. 18-7-1996. As petitioner had not completed 15 years from the date of commutation of the pension, M.P. Rules are not applicable in view of Rules of 1964, hence, decision of respondents is proper. 9. I find no merit in the petition. Same is hereby dismissed. Parties to bear their own costs as incurred in this writ petition.