Supreme Court Allows Appeals for Interest on Delayed Pension to Retired Teachers of Government Aided Colleges in Haryana — Pension is Not a Bounty but a Right, and Delay in Payment Must Be Compensated with Interest.

In Favour of Accused
  • 683
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeals arose from a common judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which set aside the grant of interest on delayed payment of revised pension to retired teachers of Government Aided Private Colleges in Haryana. The appellants, who retired before 01.01.2006, sought revised pension in the pay band of Rs.37400-67000 with AGP Rs.9000/- w.e.f. 01.01.2006 under the Haryana Civil Services (Revised Pension) Part I Rules, 2009. Initially, the State rejected their claim, leading to the filing of writ petitions in 2015. During the pendency, the State accepted the claim and issued a letter dated 07.11.2016 agreeing to pay revised pension. The writ petitions were withdrawn on 30.11.2016, and the Single Judge directed payment of arrears within three months, later clarified to be w.e.f. 01.01.2006. The State paid the arrears between 2017 and 2018 but filed a review against the interest component, which was dismissed. The State then appealed to the Division Bench, which allowed the appeals, denying interest on the ground that the appellants were fence-sitters and could not be placed at a better footing than the original litigants (Government College teachers) who had not received interest. The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, holding that pension is a right, not a bounty, and the State's delay in payment must be compensated with interest. The Court noted that the original litigants were Government College teachers who had already been receiving revised pension and the issue of interest did not arise for them; thus, the fence-sitter doctrine was misapplied. The Court directed payment of interest at 6% per annum on the arrears from the date of filing of the writ petitions (2015) until actual payment, within three months.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Pension - Interest on Delayed Payment - Haryana Civil Services (Revised Pension) Part I Rules, 2009 - The appellants, retired teachers of Government Aided Colleges, were denied interest on delayed revised pension by the High Court on the ground that they were fence-sitters. The Supreme Court held that pension is a right and not a bounty, and the State having accepted the claim and delayed payment, interest is payable. The fence-sitter doctrine is inapplicable as the original litigants (Government College teachers) had no delay in payment. (Paras 10-14)

B) Service Law - Pension - Fence-Sitter Doctrine - Haryana Civil Services (Revised Pension) Part I Rules, 2009 - The High Court erred in applying the fence-sitter doctrine to deny interest to the appellants, as the original litigants (Government College teachers) were already receiving revised pension and the issue of interest did not arise for them. The appellants were not seeking a better benefit but only interest for the period of delay caused by the State. (Paras 10-14)

C) Service Law - Pension - Interest - Haryana Civil Services (Revised Pension) Part I Rules, 2009 - The Supreme Court directed that the appellants are entitled to interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the arrears of revised pension from the date of filing of the writ petitions (2015) until the date of actual payment, to be paid within three months. (Para 14)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appellants, retired teachers of Government Aided Private Colleges in Haryana, are entitled to interest on the belated payment of revised pension with effect from 01.01.2006.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court, and restored the orders of the learned Single Judge granting interest on delayed payment of revised pension. The Court directed that the appellants are entitled to interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the arrears of revised pension from the date of filing of the writ petitions (2015) until the date of actual payment, to be paid within three months.

Law Points

  • Pension is a right
  • not a bounty
  • interest on delayed payment of pension is payable
  • fence-sitter doctrine cannot be applied to deny interest when the State itself delayed payment
  • Article 14 of the Constitution of India
  • Haryana Civil Services (Revised Pension) Part I Rules
  • 2009.
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2024 INSC 803

Civil Appeal No. of 2024 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.5017 of 2023) and connected appeals

2024-10-18

R. Mahadevan, J.

2024 INSC 803

K.C. Kaushik and Others; K.R. Malik and Others; Inderjeet Bharti and Others; Savitri Malik and Others

State of Haryana and Others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil appeals against the judgment of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana denying interest on delayed payment of revised pension to retired teachers of Government Aided Private Colleges.

Remedy Sought

The appellants sought interest on the belated payment of revised pension with effect from 01.01.2006.

Filing Reason

The State delayed payment of revised pension to the appellants, who retired before 01.01.2006, and the High Court denied interest on the delayed payment.

Previous Decisions

The learned Single Judge of the High Court had directed payment of revised pension with interest, but the Division Bench set aside the interest component. The State's review application was dismissed.

Issues

Whether the appellants are entitled to interest on the belated payment of revised pension. Whether the fence-sitter doctrine applies to deny interest to the appellants.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants: The High Court erred in denying interest by treating them as fence-sitters; the original litigants (Government College teachers) had no delay in payment, so the doctrine is inapplicable; pension is a right and delay must be compensated. Respondents: The appellants were fence-sitters who sought benefit after others litigated; they cannot be placed at a better footing than the original litigants who did not get interest.

Ratio Decidendi

Pension is a right and not a bounty; the State having accepted the claim and delayed payment, interest is payable. The fence-sitter doctrine cannot be applied to deny interest when the original litigants had no delay in payment and the issue of interest did not arise for them.

Judgment Excerpts

Pension is a right and not a bounty. The fence-sitter doctrine cannot be applied to deny interest to the appellants. The appellants are entitled to interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the arrears of revised pension from the date of filing of the writ petitions until the date of actual payment.

Procedural History

The appellants filed writ petitions in 2015 seeking revised pension. During pendency, the State accepted the claim and the petitions were withdrawn on 30.11.2016. The Single Judge directed payment of arrears within three months, later clarified w.e.f. 01.01.2006. The State paid arrears between 2017-2018 but filed a review against interest, which was dismissed. The State then filed LPAs, which were allowed by the Division Bench on 29.09.2022, denying interest. The appellants appealed to the Supreme Court by special leave.

Acts & Sections

  • Haryana Civil Services (Revised Pension) Part I Rules, 2009: Rule 6
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appeals for Interest on Delayed Pension to Retired Teachers of Government Aided Colleges in Haryana — Pension is Not a Bounty but a Right, and Delay in Payment Must Be Compensated with Interest.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal for Declaration of Adoption and Partition – Failure to Prove Ceremony of Giving and Taking Under Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. The court held that evidence of being treated as a daughter, without proof of...