Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Deepak B. Patil, retired from the post of Assistant Registrar in the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT) on 31 August 2006. He had initially served in the Maharashtra Finance and Accounts Service as Superintendent (Accounts) and was later promoted to Assistant Registrar on a temporary basis in 1992. After his retirement, the Chairman of MAT granted him provisional pension based on the Assistant Registrar post. However, the respondents subsequently sought to pay him pension based on the post of Accounts Officer, which he had never held. The petitioner challenged this before the Bombay High Court. The court considered the limited controversy and held that the petitioner was entitled to pension based on his last held post of Assistant Registrar. The court directed the respondents to pay pension and arrears accordingly, with the arrears to be paid within eight weeks.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Pension - Last Pay Drawn - The petitioner retired as Assistant Registrar but was being paid pension of Accounts Officer, a post he never held. The court held that pension must be computed based on the last post actually held by the employee. The respondents were directed to pay pension and arrears accordingly. (Paras 2-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner is entitled to pension based on the post of Assistant Registrar which he actually held, or based on the post of Accounts Officer which he never held.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition and directed the respondents to pay pension to the petitioner based on the post of Assistant Registrar, with arrears to be paid within eight weeks.
Law Points
- Pension must be computed based on the last post actually held by the employee
- not a post never held
- Pension Rules
- Administrative Tribunals Act
- 1985
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (03) 26
Writ Petition No.1156 of 2009
F.I. Rebello, J.H. Bhatia
Mr. Rui Rodrigues with Mr. Sagar G. Talekar, for the Petitioner; Mr. A.K. Jalisatgi, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 to 4
State of Maharashtra through its Principal Secretary, Director, Accounts and Treasurers, Secretary, Finance Department, Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the pension calculation based on a post never held by the petitioner.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought pension based on the post of Assistant Registrar which he actually held.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was being paid pension of Accounts Officer, a post he never held, instead of Assistant Registrar.
Previous Decisions
The Chairman of MAT granted provisional pension based on Assistant Registrar post, but later respondents sought to pay pension based on Accounts Officer post.
Issues
Whether the petitioner is entitled to pension based on the post of Assistant Registrar which he actually held, or based on the post of Accounts Officer which he never held.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that he retired as Assistant Registrar and should receive pension accordingly.
Respondents argued that the petitioner's pension should be based on the post of Accounts Officer.
Ratio Decidendi
Pension must be computed based on the last post actually held by the employee, not a post never held.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner instead of being paid pension of the said post is being paid pension in the post of Accounts Officer, which post the petitioner never held.
The petitioner retired from the post of Assistant Registrar in the office of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal.
Procedural History
The petitioner retired on 31 August 2006. The Chairman of MAT granted provisional pension based on Assistant Registrar post. Subsequently, the Assistant Director of Accounts & Treasuries communicated that the petitioner's appointment was as Accountant, leading to pension being calculated on Accounts Officer post. The petitioner filed this writ petition in 2009.
Acts & Sections
- Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985: Section 12
