Pension Litigation Case Study – Entry Pay in Level 14 & Parity of Pre-2016 and Post-2016 Retirees (S-29 Case)

Pension Litigation Case Study – Entry Pay in Level 14 & Parity of Pre-2016 and Post-2016 Retirees (S-29 Case)

2. Contempt Petition No. 648 of 2024 in OA No. 2086/2018 in Ld. CAT PB Delhi in the matter of Central Govt (S-29) Pensioners Association Vs UOI to revise the entry pay in Level 14 and complete parity of determination of pension between pre 2016 and post 2016 retirees.

2.1 Ld. CAT in the O.A. 2086/2018 vide judgement dated 06.02.2024, directed the respondents to pass appropriate orders, forthwith for re-fixation of the pension of the applicants, i.e. pre 1.1.2006 retirees/pensioners in the light of the order of this Tribunal in OA No.655/2010 and the subsequent directions and provisions of DoPPW OM dated 30.07.2015 so that the disparity, which has been created post implementation of the Sixth Central Pay Commission, is set right. Pursuant to this re-fixation, other necessary consequential benefits as would accrue to the applicants, shall also be sanctioned and extended in the favour of the applicants.

Brief on CAT Order dated 01.11.2011 in OA No. 655/2010 and DoPPW’s OM dated 30.07.2015

2.2 6th CPC had recommended that the revised pension of the pre-2006 pensioners shall in no case be lower than 50% of the sum of the minimum of the pay in the pay band and grade pay thereon corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired. DoPPW issued an OM dated 1.9.2008 in this regard.

2.3 The pre-2006 pensioners filed OA No. 655/2010 and some other cases before the Ld. CAT, Delhi contesting that minimum of the pay in the pay band refer to the minimum of the fitment Table relevant to the grade from which the Government servant retired. The Ld. CAT observed that the intent of the recommendation of the Pay Commission was changed. As per the Ld. CAT judgement, the contention of the Government that “minimum of pay in the pay band” referred to in the recommendation of the Pay Commission would mean “minimum of the pay band” is erroneous and it cannot be accepted. In the above OAs, the Ld. CAT vide its order dated 1.11.2011 ordered to refix the pension of all pre-2006 retirees w.e.f. 1.1.2006 based on resolution dated 29.8.2008.

2.4 The above judgment of the Ld. CAT, PB was challenged before the Hon’ble High Court through WP No.1535/2012, filed by the Government (DoPPW). However, in the meantime, in pursuance of a separate Government’s decision taken on the basis of recommendations of the Cabinet Secretary’s Committee (One Rank One Pay), DoPPW, vide its OM dated 28.01.2013, ordered for stepping up of the pension of pre-2006 pensioners with reference to the minimum of the fitment Table w.e.f. 24.09.2012 i.e., the date of the Cabinet decision.

2.5 The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi, in its judgement dated 29.04.2013 referred to the OM dated 28.1.2013 and stated that Government has tacitly admitted that it was in the wrong and that the Hon’ble Tribunal is correct. The only issue that survives now is with regard to the arrears and the WP was dismissed by the Hon’ble High Court.

2.6 The judgment of the Hon’ble High Court was challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court through SLPs which were also dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Accordingly, in compliance with the above judicial pronouncements, DoPPW vide OM dated 30.07.2015 issued instructions that the pension/family pension of all pre-2006 pensioners/family pensioners may be revised in accordance with DoPPW’s OM dated 28.1.2013 with effect from 1.1.2006 instead of 24.09.2012.

2.7 Thus, the OM dated 30.07.2015 issued in compliance of Hon’ble CAT order dated 01.11.2011 in OA No. 655/2010 is for fixation of pension of pre-2006 pensioners based on the principle of modified parity. There were no questions of full parity with post-2006 pensioners involved in the said OA or DoPPW OM dated 30.07.2015.

Contempt Petition before Ld. CAT PB Delhi:

2.8 The petitioners have filed a Contempt Petition No. 648 of 2024 before Ld. CAT PB Delhi in the O.A. 2086/2018 for implementation of judgement dated 06.02.2024.

2.9 In compliance of Ld. CAT order, DoPPW has issued a letter dated 30.04.2025 to All Ministries/Departments along with Petitioner Associations stating that:

“This Department has already issued instructions to all Ministries/Departments vide OM No. 38/37/08 – P&PW(A) dated 28.01.2013 and 30.07.2015 (marked to Pensioners Associations also) for revision of pension in terms of orders of the Hon’ble CAT, PB, Delhi in OA 655/2010. Further, DoPPW vide letter dated 18.12.2024 to all Ministries/Departments reiterated that in case pension of the petitioners of the concerned Ministries/Departments have not been revised w.e.f. 01.01.2006 in terms of said OMs dated 28.01.2013 and 30.07.2015 by their concerned Ministries/Departments from where they have retired, the same may be revised under intimation to this Department.

However, in case, pension of the petitioners has not been revised w.e.f. 01.01.2006 in terms of said OMs dated 28.01.2013 and 30.07.2015 by their concerned Ministries/Departments from where they have retired, same may be taken up suitably with the concerned administrative Ministries / Departments under intimation to this Department.

2.10 Finally, the Ld. CAT vide order dated 08.05.2025 closed the contempt petition stating that:

“the nodal Ministry is DOPPW which has done its part. The necessary follow-up action is to be taken up by the various Ministries and Departments, from where the applicants have retired. However, these Ministries and Departments are not before us. The order has been substantially complied with by the respondents. There is no willful disobedience to invite intervention.

In view of above, the C.P. is closed with liberty to the applicants / petitioners as per law.

The applicants/petitioners may be nursing a grievance. However, the remedy lies elsewhere.”