Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M.A. Dhavaleshwar, was appointed as a Professor in Sangolli Rayanna College (affiliated to Rani Chennamma University) on 26-07-1982. He served continuously and retired as Grade I Principal on 30-06-2019. Upon retirement, he was denied regular pension by the University on the ground that his service from 26-07-1982 to 31-03-1995 was non-contributory under the Karnataka State Universities' Pension Scheme, 1995, which was adopted by the University only from 01-04-1995. The petitioner contended that he had contributed to the Contributory Provident Fund (CPF) during that period and that the University's action was arbitrary. He sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant regular pension computed on his last drawn salary and release arrears of Rs.12,72,097/- with interest. The respondents argued that the pension scheme was prospective and that the petitioner was not entitled to pension for the non-contributory period. The Court, after hearing arguments, held that pension is a right and not a bounty, and that the University cannot deny pension for the period prior to the scheme's adoption. The Court directed the respondents to grant regular pension to the petitioner based on his last drawn salary at the time of retirement and to release the arrears of pension with interest at 6% per annum from the date of retirement until realization. The writ petition was allowed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Pension - Regular Pension - Computation on Last Drawn Salary - The petitioner, a retired Professor and Principal, sought direction to grant regular pension based on his last drawn salary. The University denied pension claiming his initial service from 26-07-1982 to 31-03-1995 was non-contributory under the Karnataka State Universities' Pension Scheme, 1995. The Court held that pension is a right and not a bounty, and the University cannot deny pension for the period prior to the scheme's adoption. The Court directed the respondents to grant regular pension computed on the petitioner's last drawn salary and release arrears with interest at 6% per annum. (Paras 1-15) B) Service Law - Pension Scheme - Contributory vs Non-Contributory Period - The University argued that the petitioner's service from 1982 to 1995 was non-contributory and thus not eligible for pension. The Court rejected this, holding that the pension scheme applies to all employees who retired after its adoption, and the University's classification of service periods was arbitrary. The Court relied on the principle that pension is a deferred salary and must be paid for the entire service period. (Paras 8-12) C) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Enforcement of Pension Rights - The petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a mandamus to direct the respondents to grant regular pension and release arrears. The Court allowed the petition, holding that the petitioner has a fundamental right to pension under Article 21 (right to life) and that the University's inaction was violative of constitutional guarantees. (Paras 1, 15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular pension computed on his last drawn salary at the time of retirement, and whether the respondents can deny pension on the ground that the petitioner's initial service period was non-contributory under the Karnataka State Universities' Pension Scheme.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to grant regular pension to the petitioner computed on his last drawn salary at the time of retirement and to release the arrears of pension with interest at 6% per annum from the date of retirement until realization.
Law Points
- Pension is a right
- not a bounty
- and must be computed on last drawn salary
- denial of pension on ground of non-contributory service period is arbitrary
- University cannot deny pension to employees who served prior to adoption of pension scheme
- mandamus lies for enforcement of pension rights
