No Entitlement to Separate Pension Or Gratuity For Subsequent Re-Employment After Retiring On Pension: Gauhati HC

The bench of Justice Lanusungkum Jamir while noting that the deduction of the pension amount paid by the Govt. of Nagaland to the Petitioner by the REC Silchar is illegal observed, “The learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 has failed to show any rule or law which entitles the REC Silchar (now NIT Silchar) to deduct the pension amount from the salaries of the petitioner while she was re-employed under the REC Silchar.”

Present Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner after he was aggrieved by the communication by the Assistant Registrar, National Institute of Technology, Silchar, according to which, the Petitioner was granted the benefit of voluntary retirement by the Government of Nagaland and subsequently re-employed in REC Silchar, presently NIT Silchar, therefore, Petitioner is not entitled to get a second pension from the Institute in terms of Rule 7(2) of the CCS (Pension) Rules 1972.

As per the Counsel for the Petitioner, Advocate S. Banik, the Petitioner was not under re-employment in the service of the NIT and therefore, the above-mentioned rule does not apply to her and therefore, she is entitled to get pensionary benefits from the NIT.

He further argued that her pension amount from the Government of Nagaland was deducted from her monthly salary by NIT Silchar till her retirement hence, she is entitled to get pensionary benefits from the NIT.

In his contention, Advocate S.P. Choudhury, who is appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences in the erstwhile REC Silchar, as per him, she maintained lien to the post of Assistant Teacher under the Government of Nagaland till her confirmation in the REC Silchar. He further mentioned that while calculating the qualifying service for voluntary retirement from the Govt. of Nagaland the period rendered by the petitioner at REC Silchar was taken into account for arriving at the qualifying service of 20 years for voluntary retirement.

As per the Counsel for the Respondents, the Board of Governors in its 61st meeting under Item No.9, had treated the Petitioner as a re-employed pensioner w.e.f April 1, 1988. As per him, again, the Principal, Regional Engineering College, Silchar by an order dated October 16, 1993, had treated the service of the Petitioner as a re-employed pensioner from the same date, under the REC, Silchar.

While contending that there is no merit in the present Writ Petition, Counsel for the Respondent submitted that the order dated October 10, 1993, is not under challenge and the Petitioner had accepted the said order and therefore, the Petitioner cannot claim that her employment in the REC (now NIT Silchar) is a regular employment and not a re-employment.

The Gauhati High Court after perusing the order dated October 10, 1993, concluded that there is no infirmity in the contents of the communication by the Assistant Registrar since the employment of the petitioner in the NIT Silchar is a re-employment and not a regular service.

The single bench disposed of the Writ Petition with directions as to payment of the deducted amount of pension.