In the case of appellant, on his request, 100 companymutation of pension was allowed by the Government of India.
On deputation, the pay of the appellant was regulated in terms of the FA and CAOs Office Memorandum, dated 12.12.1979, and the appellant received his pay, as admissible from time to time, plus the deputation duty allowance.
Reliance was placed by the respondents on para 506 i and 501 4 1 of the Manual of Railway Pension Rules, 1950, hereinafter referred to as MRP Rules , and Rules 2544 and B CSRs 486 A and 486 B of Indian Railway Establishment Code, Vol.
The appellant was permanently absorbed in the HOCL with effect from 8.12.1982 following his resignation from the Central Railways.
150 per month, which the appellant was drawing, while on deputation from the Central Railways, to the HOCL.
Appellant in person.
From the Judgment and Order dated 18.4.1990 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi in O.A. No.
It was urged that the service rendered by the appellant on deputation to the HOCL was foreign service and, therefore, the deputation duty allowance received by him companyld number be included in the expression emoluments for the purpose of calculation of pension.
II hereinafter referred to as IRE Code .
It is pertinent to numberice here that the appellant had opted for companytributory provident fund and had received the benefit in respect thereof form the HOCL for the period for which he was on deputation.
Having failed to persuade the authorities, through various representations, to include the deputation duty allowance for the purpose of calculation of his pension, the appellant approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi.
In accordance with the relevant orders of the Government of India, a pensionary employee, on permanent absorption in a public sector undertaking, is entitled to the grant of pension on the basis of qualifying years of service etc.
80 220.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR.
A.S. ANAND, J. The short and only question requiring companysideration of this Court in this appeal, by Special Leave, from the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, made in OA No.
The claim of the appellant was companytested by the respondents before the Tribunal on various grounds.
The appellant claimed his pensionary benefits from the Central Railways.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The Government of India, however, makes a departure in such cases, from the numbermal rule of companymutation of pension to the extent of 1/3rd of the pension to full 100 companymutation of pension.
The necessary and relevant facts are as follows The appellant was appointed as a Clerk, Grade II, in the Office of the Financial Adviser and Chief Accounts officer, Central Railways, Bombay V.T., on 25.1.1950.
542/87 on 18th of April, 1990 is whether for calculating the pension, the amount paid by way of deputation duty allowance by Hindustan Organic Chemicals Limited, Rasayani to the appellant, while on deputation from the Railways, is to be included ?
Dr. Anand Prakash, Ms. Sarla Chandra, B. Krishna Prasad NP and K. Verma for the Respondents.
127 of 1991.
In 1953, he was promoted as Stock Verifier in the pay scale of Rs.
542 of 1987.
At the time of proceeding on deputation, the pay scale of the appellant in the Central Railways was Rs.490 30 640 35 815 40 1055.
While the appellant was so working, in 1979, he proceeded on deputation to join as a Vigilance Inspector in the Hindustan Organic Chemicals Limited hereinafter referred to as HOCL initially for a period of one year, which period was extended from time to time till he was permanently absorbed in HOCL on 8.12.1982.
