GOPALAKRISHAN AND ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA

Citation: [1995] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 608 · Decided: 31-10-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, B.N. KIRPAL · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
E. GOPALAKRISHAN AND ORS. 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA 
OCTOBER 31, 1995 
B 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND B.N. KIRPAL, JJ.] 
Se1vice Law : 
Pension-Computation of-Special pay-Inclusion of-Held, Appel-
C /ants having retired prior to the date on which notional pay was given effect 
to, scale of pay including special pay cannot be stepped up for computing 
pension. 
The appellants, while working as Upper Division Clerks, were draw-
ing special pay of Rs. 35 per month. The Department issued instructions 
D by memo dated 11.7.1979 specifying that the special pay would not be paid 
to the promoted Head Clerks or Chief Clerks. Accordingly, when the 
appellants were promoted as Head Clerks or Chief Clerks they did not 
carry with them the special pay of Rs. 35. Later, in order to avoid anomaly 
in the pay structure, the Board of Arbitration decided that special pay of 
E R•. 35 would also be paid to the promoted Head Clerks Chief Clerks with 
effect from 1.9.1985 but without arrears. The Central Administrative 
Tribunal also held that the persons who had not been paid the special pa:' 
from 11.7.1979 till 31.8.1985 would also be entitled to the said special pay, 
but they were not entitled to the arrears. The appellants who retired prior 
F 
G 
to 1.9.1985, claimed that they were entitled to step up their pay by including 
Rs. 35 per month for purpose of calculating the pension. Their claim was 
rejected by the Department as also by the Central Administrative 
Tribunal. Aggrieved, they filed the appeal by special leave. 
Dismissing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : 1.1. Pension is required to be computed on calculation of 
average of 10 months' pay actually drawn by the employee. The appellants 
have retired prior to September 1,1985. Since they were not in service as 
on Se1itember 1, 1985, the date on which the notional pay was given effect 
to, they had not actually drawn the pay including Rs. 35 per month. 
H 
Accordingly, the scale of pay including 
Rs. 35 per month cannot be 
608 
E.GOPALAKRJSHANv. U.0.1. 
609 
stepped up for computing the pension. (610-H, 6ll-A) 
1.2. The benefit that was given by the Board as well as the 
order of the Tribunal and the respondents was to ren1ove the anomaly in 
the pay structure and bring uniformity applying notional scale of' pay of' 
those promoted as head clerks/chief' clerks between July 11, 1979 to 
August 31, 1985 but denied payment of arrears. Thus, no salary with Rs. 
35 as special pay was made to any one. That benefit was given only to 
those who continued in service after September l, 1985. The notional pay 
is considered in that perspective only for the purpose of removing the 
anomaly. [610-G] 
A 
B 
c 
CIVIL APPELLATE .JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1423 of 
1995. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 26.4.93 of the Central Ad-
ministrative Tribunal, Madras Bench in O.A. No. 1165 of 1991. 
S. Sundarvaradan and K. Swami for the Appellants. 
A. Jayaram, Additional Solicitor General, A.D.N. Rao, Arivind Kr. 
Sharma and C.V.S. Rao for the Respondent. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
The appellants, nine in number, admittedly had retired prior to 
September 1, 1985 as either head clerks or chief clerks, the last being June 
30, 1985. It appears that a practice was in vogue at one point of time that 
for the discharge of special duties 1 a sun1 of Rs. 35 p.111. as special pay \Vas 
granted to the upper division clerks working in certain special posts. 
Decision was taken that on promotion as head clerk or .special clerk, they 
would not be entitled to carry with them the special pay of Rs. 35 per 
month. Admittedly, the appellants had been promoted, as stated earlier, as 
head clerks or chief clerks and they were not given the special pay of Rs. 
D 
E 
F 
35 per month from the date of their promotion till the date of their G 
retirement prior to September 1, 1985. It is also clear that in the memo 
dated July 11, 1979, it was expressly stated that the special pay would not 
be paid to the promoted head clerks or chief clerks. Subsequently, it 
appears that there was an agitation and a reference to the Board of 
Arbitration was made which had decided that with a view to remove the H 
610 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 
A anomaly in the pay structure, the special pay of Rs. 35 per month shall be 
paid lo the promoted head clerks/chief clerks w.e.f. September 1, 1985 but 
without paying arrears. Challenging the non-availment thereof; some of the 
employees had approache

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.