Case Note & Summary
The case involves a writ appeal filed by the Union of India and other BSF authorities against an order of a Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court. The respondent, B.S. Bopaiah, a retired Subedar of the Border Security Force (BSF), had filed a writ petition seeking quashing of an endorsement dated 31.12.2005 that denied him pro-rata pension for his past service in the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF). The respondent had served in the CRPF from 1972 to 1975 and then in the BSF from 1975 until his retirement in 2005. Upon retirement, he was denied pro-rata pension for his CRPF service on the ground that the service was not qualifying. The Single Judge allowed the writ petition, quashing the endorsement and directing the authorities to consider the respondent's request for pro-rata pension. The appellants challenged this order in the writ appeal. The Division Bench of the High Court, after hearing both sides, dismissed the appeal, holding that the respondent's service in both CRPF and BSF constituted qualifying service under Rule 37 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, and that the denial of pro-rata pension was arbitrary and discriminatory, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The court upheld the Single Judge's order and directed the appellants to grant pro-rata pension to the respondent within three months.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Pension - Pro-rata Pension - Rule 37 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 - Entitlement to pro-rata pension for past service in CRPF and BSF - The respondent served in CRPF from 1972 to 1975 and in BSF from 1975 to 2005. Upon retirement, he was denied pro-rata pension for his CRPF service. The court held that the respondent's entire service in CRPF and BSF is qualifying service under Rule 37, and the denial was discriminatory. The Single Judge's order quashing the endorsement was upheld. (Paras 2-10) B) Constitutional Law - Article 14 - Discrimination - Arbitrary denial of pension - The court found that the appellants' action in denying pro-rata pension to the respondent while granting it to similarly situated employees was violative of Article 14. The endorsement dated 31.12.2005 was quashed. (Paras 2-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondent is entitled to pro-rata pension for his past service in CRPF and BSF, and whether the endorsement dated 31.12.2005 denying such pension is arbitrary and violative of Article 14.
Final Decision
The writ appeal is dismissed. The order of the Single Judge dated 18.11.2010 in Writ Petition No. 1992/2009 is upheld. The appellants are directed to grant pro-rata pension to the respondent within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Law Points
- Pro-rata pension
- Qualifying service
- CCS (Pension) Rules
- 1972
- Rule 37
- Border Security Force
- Central Reserve Police Force
- Article 14
- Discrimination
