'Last Pay Drawn' Includes Not Only Basic Pay But Also All Other Allowances For Re-Employed Pensioners: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has affirmed that 'last pay drawn' includes all emoluments, including CPF contributions for re-employed pensioners.
The Court was considering a Contempt Petition against the Respondents for willful disobedience of the directions of the Court in terms of the provision of Article 215 of the Constitution of India, 1950, read with Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
The single-bench of Justice Dharmesh Sharma observed, "The sum and substance of the aforesaid discussion is that this Court vide order dated 12.02.2019, as clarified later vide order dated 08.11.2019 categorically laid down that Rule 3(1)(b) and Rule 6(1)(b) would include not only basic pay but “all other allowance” including dearness allowance. There is no denying that the term 'all other allowances' is broad and encompasses various benefits, including financial advantages such as government contributions to the CPF."
The Petitioner was represented by Advocate Tushar Gupta while the Respondent was represented by Advocate Avnish Ahlawat.
The Petitioners, some of whom retired as the Judicial Officers from the District Courts of Delhi, while others from the Executive Department of the GNCTD were appointed as Members in the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and District Consumer Redressal Forums in Delhi. In terms of Amended Rules 3(1)(b) and 6(1)(b) of the Delhi Consumer Protection Rules, 1987 it is stated that upon appointment as Members in the aforesaid authorities viz., SCDRC and DCRF, the petitioners had the option to receive salaries based on the last pay drawn minus their pension. Except for the petitioner, the remaining Petitioners have since been granted appropriate reliefs by the Respondents.
The Original Petitioners raised a review petitions with legal question to the effect that the expression "last pay drawn‟ occurring in the proviso to Rules 3(1)(b) and 6(1)(b) of the Rules would include "not only basic pay but also all other allowances including dearness allowance‟ and the same was allowed. It was declared that the expression "last pay drawn‟ would include not only the Basic Pay but all other allowances including dearness allowances, which were drawn prior to the appointment as Member of either the SCDRC and DCRF.
The Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that although the Petitioner had always been ready and willing to make contribution towards CPF, his earlier representation was rejected on the ground that there is no provision in the Consumer Protection Act, 198612 or the Rules for contribution towards the "CPF‟ for the members of the State Commission.
The Court was of the view that the contention of the Respondents cannot be countenanced in law and observed, "Although Rule 4 of the “Contributory Provident Fund Rules” by Swamy provides that such rules would be applicable to every non-pensionable servant of the Government belonging to any service under the control of the President, however, it appears that the respondents overlooked the proviso which clearly provides as under: - “provided also that nothing contained in this rule shall apply to a Government servant appointed on or after the first day of January, 2004.‟"
The Court concluded that 'last pay drawn' would include all emoluments, including CPF contributions for re-employed pensioners.
"Incidentally, the respondents have not cared to file a counter-affidavit, and the compliance affidavit filed by Mr. Vinod Kumar, Assistant Director (Consumer Affairs) Department of Food Supplies and Consumer Affairs, dated 04.09.2023, is based on input from the Finance Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, and cannot be sustained in law. Furthermore, the respondents in the aforesaid writ petitions and the review petitions never raised any objection that "all other allowances‟ would not include any contribution to be made to the CPF by the Government," the Court further observed.
The Petition was accordingly disposed off.
Cause Title: Narinder Paul Kaushik & Ors. vs. Chief Secretary & Ors.
Appearances:
Petitioner- Advocate Tushar Gupta, Advocate Sumit Mishra, Advocate Parinay Gupta, Advocate
Respondent- Senior Advocate Avnish Ahlawat, Advocate Nitesh Kumar Singh, Advocate Laavanya Kaushik, Advocate Aliza Alam, Advocate Mohnish Sehrawat
Click here to read/ download Judgement:
