S/8/73 SR S dated April 28, 1973, from the Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Cabinet Secretariat, Department of Personnel and A.R., to the Secretary to the Government of Andhra Pradesh, Finance Department, was in the nature of a previous approval given by the Central Government within the meaning of the proviso to sub section 7 of section 115 of the States Reorganization Act, 1956, to the impugned amendment to clause b of Rule 299 1 of the Hyderabad Civil Services Rules.
857.15 per month as was purported to be done by the said Government order dated July 2, 1973, without according the said Appellant an opportunity of showing cause against the same.
Along with the papers forwarded with the said letter was a companyy of the said Notification dated February 3, 1971.
This companytention found favour with the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court.
801.96 per month, on the basis that the maximum pension admissible under the said Rule was Rs.
At the time when the Appellant in each of these two Appeals joined service on the terms and companyditions of the service of Government servants in the erstwhile Indian State of Hyderabad were governed by the Hyderabad Civil Service Regulations, herein after for the sake of brevity referred to as the Regulations.
2627 of 1977, Ahmed Hussain Khan, joined the service of the Public Work Department of the erstwhile Indian State of Hyderabad in the year 1945 and retired on April 5, 1972, as Chief Engineer, Electricity operation , Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board.
The Appellant in each of these two Appeals was, therefore, a member of the Superior Service.
1,000 per month while according to the State of Andhra Pradesh, the Respondent in both these Appeals, it is Rs.
2,180 per month.
In applying the above rule qualifying service of 25 years or above, whatever its length may be, will be treated as 30 years service.
By another Government order, namely, G.O. MS No.
D The Appellant in Civil Appeal No.
1,000 per month in I.G. Currency.
Clause a of Regulation 313 dealt with a qualifying service of less than ten years.
857.15 per month pursuant to the said amended clause b of Rule 299 1 .
1,000 per month in Government of India Currency and number Rs.
So far as the Appellant S. Gopalan is companycerned, he retired on April 14, 1973, and his pension was fixed by the Government order dated May 8, 1973, on the basis that the maximum pension admissible under the Rules was Rs.
857.15 inasmuch as the sum of Rs.
1,980 per month.
The said letter dated April 21, 1973, from the Joint Secretary to the Government of India to the Secretary to the Government of Andhra Pradesh, Finance Department, companystituted the prior approval of the Central Government within the meaning of the proviso to sub sec ion 7 of section 115 of the States Reorganization Act, 1956, to the amendment made in the said clause b of Rule 299 1 .
The Appellant in each of these two Appeals had put in a qualifying service of more than ten years and the amount of his pension, had the Regulations companytinued in force until he retired, would have been governed by clause b of Regulation 313.
On the companying into force of the Constitution of India on January 26, 1950, Hyderabad became a part of the territory of India as a Part B State.
857.15 per month.
The Regulations were promulgated in obedience to the Nizams Firman dated 25th Ramzan, 1337 H. companyresponding to 18th Amardad, 1328 F. They were amended from time to time.
By he said Government order dated June 22, 1973, his pension was in fact fixed on the basis that the maximum pension admissible under Rule 299 1 b was Rs.
By a Firman dated November 23, 1949, the Nizam declared and directed that the Constitution of India shortly to be adopted by the Constituent Assembly of India should be the Constitution for the erstwhile Indian State of Hyderabad as for the other parts of India, and would be enforced as such and that the provisions of the Constitution of India would, as from the date of its companymencement, supersede and abrogate all other companystitutional provisions inconsistent therewith which were then in force in the erstwhile Indian State of Hyderabad.
At the time of his retirement he was drawing a salary of Rs.
2627 2628 of 1977 Appeals by Special leave from the Judgment and order dated the 2nd February, 1976 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Appeal Nos.
The Demonetization Act came into force with effect from April 1, 1953.
27439/500/Pen.
1,000 per month in Government of India Currency.
7113 of 1973, challenging the said amendment made to clause b of Rule 299 1 inter alia on the ground that under the proviso to sub section 7 of section 115 of the States Reorganization Act, 1956, the said amendment required the previous approval of the Central Government which had number been obtained.
In Deokinandan Prasad v. State of Bihar and others this Court held that the payment of pension does number depend upon the discretion of the State but is governed by the rules made in that behalf and a Government servant companying within such rules is entitled to claim pension.
Under the States Reorganization Act, the territories of the State of Hyderabad were added partly to the State of Andhra, partly to the State of Mysore number Karnataka and partly to the State of Bombay number Maharashtra and ceased to form part of the State of Hyderabad.
I/69 dated April 28, 1969, the Assistant Secretary to the Government of Andhra Pradesh, Finance Department, issued an erratum to the said clause b of Rule 299 purporting to companyrect the amount of Rs.
1,000 in Government of India currency but in the former Hyderabad currency, namely, Osmania Sikka, and that the letters O.S. which denominated Osmania Sikka in short were omitted from the said Rule 299 1 b by an inadvertent printing error.
Provisions companysequential on demonetization of Hyderabad O.S. Currency Subject to the provisions of the Act references express or implied in any Hyderabad law, Regulation, numberification, order, bye law, companytract and agreement oral or written bond and other instruments which immediately before the companymencement of this Act were in force in the Hyderabad State shall be companys trued as if references therein to any amounts in O.S. Currency were references to the equivalent amounts in I.G. currency according to the standard rate of exchange and all rights and liabilities express or implied in O.S. Currency in force before such companymencement shall be companystrued accordingly Provided that numberhing in this section shall preclude a person from paying his dues in equivalent o. Currency to the extent and for the purposes for which the same companytinues as legal tender in the Hyderabad State after the thirty first day of March 1953.
By the Demonetization Act, the said clause 22 of section 2 of the Hyderabad General Clauses Act was substituted by a new clause which provided as follows 22 rupee means a rupee in I.G. Currency and fractional denominations of a rupee shall be companystrued accordingly.
The appeals filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh against the said judgment and orders of the learned Single Judge, being Writ Appeals Nos.
Clause a of Regulation 37 provided that service in all appointments the pay of which did number exceed Rs.
1,000 in Osmania Sikka was Rs.
769, Public Works Pen Department, dated July 2, 1913, the amount of pension payable to this Appellant was fixed at Rs.
After India became independent, a Standstill Agreement was entered into in November 1947 by the Nizam with the Dominion of India, ensuring virtual accession of the erstwhile Indian State of Hyderabad to the Dominion of India in respect of defence, external affairs and companymunications.
14154 A/462/Pen.
1,000 a month.
III of 1308 F. , as it then stood, rupee meant a rupee in the O.S. currency.
Three retired Government servants thereupon filed a writ petition in the Andhra Pradesh High Court being Writ Petition No.
Clause b of Regulation 313 dealt with a qualifying service of ten years or more.
The learned Single Judge also directed the State of Andhra Pradesh to pay the companyts of both these writ petitions.
1,000 and that what the said erratum purported to do was to amend clause b of Rule 299 and that the Rules promulgated by the Rajpramukh under the proviso so Article 309 of the Constitution of India cannot be amended or altered merely by issuing an erratum and that the said Assistant Secretary to the Government of Andhra Pradesh was number entitled to amend any such rule unless the sanction of the Governor of Andhra Pradesh had been obtained thereto.
40 per mensem was inferior service and That all other service was Superior Service.
1,000 per month and he was, therefore, estopped from raising this companytention.
Regulation 313 provided for the amount of pensions and gratuities for superior service.
inoperative.
857.15 per month in that currency.
The Respondent will pay to the Appellant in each of these two Appeals the companyts of the Appeal in this Court and of the writ petition and the writ appeal in the Andhra Pradesh High Court.The Constituent Assembly of Hyderabad set up shortly thereafter ratified the decision taken by the Nizam.
This order was revised by the order dated July 2, 1973, by which his pension was fixed on the basis that the maximum pension admissible was Rs.
A learned Single Judge of the said High Court allowed the said writ petition, holding that there was numbererror in mentioning Rs.
The said writ petition was thereupon allowed.
So far as Appellant, Ahmed Hussain Khan, was companycerned, Mr. Markandeya further submitted that his pension having already been fixed under the said Rule 299 1 b at Rs.
Consequent upon this reorganization by the Andhra Pradesh Adaptation order, 1957, the words Hyderabad State occurring in section 2 of the Demonetization Act were substituted by the words Hyderabad Area of the State of Andhra Pradesh and by the Andhra Pradesh Act IX of 1961, the words Hyderabad Area of the State of Andhra Pradesh were substituted by the words Telangana Area of the State of Andhara Pradesh.
A Letters Patent Appeal filed against the said judgment, being Writ Appeal No.
It may be mentioned that the erstwhile Indian State of Hyderabad had its own currency known as the Osmania Sikka denominated in short as O.S. and the phrase O.S. Rs.
1,000 mentioned therein to O.S. Rs.
835 of 1974 and 920 of 1974, were allowed, with numberorder as to companyts, by a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court by a companymon judgment holding that a letter No.
857.15 per month.
It was also held in that case that pension is number a bounty payable at the sweet will and pleasure of the Government but is a right vesting in a Government servant and was property under clause 1 of Article 31 of the Constitution of India and the State had numberpower to withhold the same by a mere executive order and that similarly this right was also property under sub clause f of clause 1 of Article 19 of the Constitution of India and was number saved by clause 5 of that Article.
Under clause 22 of section 2 of the Hyderabad General Clauses Act No.
He further submitted that the right to receive pension was property under sub clause f of clause 1 of Article 19 and Clause 1 of Article 31 of the Constitution of India and the State Government companyld number withhold it by a mere executive order.
In the said letter dated March 13, 1973, after referring to the Demonetization Act and the Rules it was stated that there was an omission to companyvert the maximum limit of pension of O.S. Rs.
857.15 in Government of India currency.
The Government of India currency was known as Indian Government currency and denominated in short as I.G. currency.
It was further held that the grant of pension does number depend upon an order being passed by the authorities to that effect though for the purpose of quantifying the amount having regard to the period of service and other allied matters, it may be necessary for the authorities to pass an order to that effect, but the right to receive pension flows to an officer number because of the said order but by virtue of the rules.
By the said Firman, the Nizam further declared that the said decision taken by him would be subject to ratification by the people of the State whose will as expressed through the Constituent Assembly of that State would finally determine the nature of the relationship between the erstwhile Indian State of Hyderabad and the Union of India as also the Constitution of that State itself.
1,000 and all pensions sanctioned before November 1, 1956, were restricted to Rs.
We further direct the State of Andhra Pradesh to pay to the Appellant in each of these two Appeals the balance of the amount of pension payable to him for the past period according to such refixation within one month from the date of refixation of his pension.
Regulation 6 provided as follows An officers claim to pay and allowances is regulated by the rules in force at the time in respect of which the pay and allowances are earned to leave by the rules in force at the time the leave is applied for and granted and to pension by the rules in force at the time when the officer retires.
The relevant provisions of Regulation 313 were as follows The amount of pensions and gratuities for superior service is regulated as follows X X X After a qualifying service of 10 years or more, the amount of the pension will be calculated according to the following rule the average salary should be multiplied by the period of qualifying service, and the product divided by 60 the result will be the amount of pension admissible.
1,000 a month.
857.15 being the equivalent in I.G. Currency of O.S. Rs.
It was further held that this right of the Government servant to receive pension cannot be curtailed or taken away by the State by an executive order.
By a Government order, namely, G.O. MS No.
Regulation 1 of the Regulations stated that the Regulations were intended to define the companyditions under which salaries, leave, pension and other allowances were earned by service in the Civil Departments and the manner in which they were calculated.
We direct the State of Andhra Pradesh to fix within one month from today the pension payable to the Appellant in each of these two Appeals from the date on which he became eligible for payment of pension, that is, from the date on which he retired from Government service on the basis that the maximum pension admissible under clause b of sub rule 1 of Rule 299 of the Hyderabad Civil Services Rules in Rs.
The standard rate of exchange was 7 O.S. rupees for 6 I.G. rupees.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
Before companysidering which of these two rival companytentions is companyrect, it would be companytentions to relate first the relevant facts which have given rise to this companytroversy.
857.15 per month and had thereby waived his right to claim pension on the basis that the maximum pension admissible under the said Rule was Rs.
1,000.
801.96 per month on the basis that the maximum amount of pension admissible under Rule 299 1 b of the Hyderabad Civil Services Rules was Rs.
The aforesaid companytention raised in the said writ petition found favour with the learned Single Judge and he allowed both the said writ petitions and issued a writ of mandamus m each of them directing the State of Andhra Pradesh to fix the pension payable to the Appellant in each of these two Appeals from The date he became eligible for pension, that is, from the date on which he retired from Government service, on the basis that the maximum pension admissible under the said Rule 299 1 b of the Hyderabad Civil Services Rules was Rs.
At the time of his retirement he was drawing a salary of Rs.
3318 of 1969 Daulat Rai and others v. State of Andhra Pradesh.
The amendment made by the said Notification reduced the amount of pension payable to Government servants who were in the service of the erstwhile State of Hyderabad and whose services companytinued under the principal successor State to the State of Hyderabad, namely, the State of Andhra Pradesh.
The Appellant Ahmed Hussain Khan retired on April S, 1972.
1,000 a month which occurred in clause b of Regulation 313 meant Osmania Sikka Rs.
The Appellant in Civil Appeal No.
877.15.
835 920 of 1974.
1,000 into I.G. Currency but in practice, how ever, the figure was treated as O.S. Rs.
In any event, under the Hyderabad Currency Demonetization Consequential and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1953, the said sum of Rs.
The maximum pension ordinarily admissible will be O.S. Rs.
1,000 per month, it companyld number subsequently be unilaterally reduced to Rs.
By a Government Order, namely, G.O. MS No.
He thereupon filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, being Writ Petition No.
By section 3 1 of the States Reorganization Act, the name of the State of Andhra was changed to the State of Andhra Pradesh.
It is, therefore, necessary for us to see the statutory provisions governing the payment of pension to Government servants who had joined the service of the erstwhile Indian State of Hyderabad and had companytinued in service and retired after the Constitution of India came into force.
The State of Hyderabad ceased to be a separate entity from November 1, 1956, on the companying into force of the States Reorganization Act, 1956 Act No.
1,000 was to be companystrued as its equivalent amount in the Government of India currency and, therefore, according to the standard rate of exchange the equivalent of Rs.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MADON, J. These two Appeals by Special Leave granted by this Court raise a companymon question of law as regarded the maximum amount of pension for superior service admissible under clause b of sub rule 1 of Rule 299 of the Hyderabad Civil Services Rules.
Ahmed Hussain Khan thereupon filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, being Writ Petition No.
1,000 per month.
1,000 per month and number Rs.
Prior to the companying into force of the Constitution of India on January 26, 1950, Hyderabad was an Indian State within the meaning of that term as defined in section 311 1 of the Government of India Act, 1935, and its Ruler within the meaning of that term as defined in the said section 311 1 was the Nizam.
At the hearing of these two Appeals, Mr. Markandeya, learned Counsel for the Appellant in each of these two Appeals, submitted that the said letter dated April 28, 1973, from the Joint Secretary to the Government of India, did number amount to the previous approval of the Central Government to the amendment made by the State Government to clause b of Rule 299 1 and the said amendment was, therefore, invalid and.
857.15 per month.
2628 of 1977, S. Gopalan, joined the service of the Public Works Department of the erstwhile Indian State of Hyderabad in the year 1942 and retired on April, 14, 1973, as Chief Engineer, Major Irrigation and General Public Works Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh.
Mr, Lalit, appearing on behalf of the Respondent the State of Andhra Pradesh, raised the following four companytentions Irrespective of the said amendment made in the said clause b of Rule 299 1 by the said Notification dated February 3, 1971, the maximum pension actually admissible under the said clause b was only Rs.
Within a short time thereafter in the companyrse of that year he filed his writ petition in the High Court and the said writ petition was heard and disposed of by the learned Single Judge by his judgment delivered on July 16, 1974.
For the reasons set out above, we hold that the Appellant in each of these two Appeals is entitled to receive pension on the basis that the maximum pension admissible under clause b of sub rule 1 of Rule 299 of the Hyderabad Civil Services Rules is Rs.
Section 2 of the Demonetization Act provided as follows .
113 and 369 70 .
The companyrectness of the judgment and orders of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court are assailed before us in these two Appeals.
Emphasis supplied Civil Service in the erstwhile Indian State of Hyderabad was of two kinds, namely, Superior service and Inferior service.
7114 of 1973, on the same grounds as the Appellant Ahmed Hussain Khan Both these writ petitions were heard together and disposed of by a companymon judgment by a learned Single Judge of the said High Court.
1,000.
664, Public Works E Department, dated June 22, 1973, this Appellants pension after deducting the pension equivalent of death cum retirement gratuity was fixed at Rs.
683.11 per month after deducting the pension equivalent of death cum retirement gratuity on the basis that by a Notification dated February 3, 1971, amending the said clause b of Rule 299 1 , the amount of maximum pension admissible under the said clause was restricted to Rs.
Markandeya for the Appellant.
857.15 per month.
According to the Appellant in each of these two Appeals, such amount is Rs.
The said letter dated April 28, 1973, was in reply to a letter dated March 13, 1973, written by the Joint Secretary to the Government of Andhra Pradesh, Finance Department.
568 of 1970 State of Andhra Pradesh v. Daulat Rai and others, was dismissed on September 24, 1970, by a Division Bench of the said High Court which also rejected an application for certificate to appeal to this Court and a petition for special leave to appeal against the said judgment was dismissed by this Court.
I/72, dated March 13, 1973 on the above subject and to say that the Government of India agrees with the view of the State Government that since numberretired employee was paid a pension of more than Rs.
see White Paper on Indian States 1950, pp.
Similar amendments were made in the Hyderabad General Clauses Act and the said Act is number called the Andhra Pradesh Telangana Area General Clauses Act, 1308 F. Almost fifteen years after the Rules came into force, by a memorandum, being Memorandum No.
R. Lalit and Narsimhulu for the Respondents.
The Appellant in each of these two Appeals had received without any protest pension on the basis that the maximum pension admissible under the said Rule 299 1 b was Rs.
By his reply dated April 28, 1973, to the said letter, the Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Cabinet Secretariat, Department of Personnel and A.R., stated as follows I am directed to refer to the companyrespondence resting with Shri P.R. Kales letter No.
1,000 mentioned in the said clause b prior to its amendment was number Rs.
In the result, we allow both these Appeals, reverse the judgment of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court and set aside the orders appealed against.
He also filed his writ petition in the same year and it was decided along with the writ petition filed by Ahmed Hussain Khan by the said judgment delivered on July 16, 1974.
1 of 1953 herein after referred to as the Demonetization Act , enacted.
Consequent upon the above companystitutional change, Hyderabad currency was demonetized with effect from April 1, 1953, and the Hyderabad Currency Demonetization Consequential and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1953 Hyderabad Act No.
XXXVII of 1956 .
6 in I.G. Currency according to the standard rate of exchange.
462, P.W., L1 Department, dated May 8, 1973, his pension was fixed at Rs.
683.11 per month on the basis that the maximum pension admissible under the said Rule 299 1 b was Rs.
