STATE OF ODISHA & ORS. versus MANJU NAIK

Citation: [2019] 14 S.C.R. 473 · Decided: 04-12-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R. BANUMATHI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
473
STATE OF ODISHA & ORS.
v.
MANJU NAIK
(Civil Appeal No. 9204 of 2019)
DECEMBER 04, 2019
[R. BANUMATHI, A.S.BOPANNA AND
HRISHIKESH ROY, JJ.]
Orissa Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1992: rr. 39, 47(5)(i)
and 49 – Invalid pension –Whether the minimum qualifying service
prescribed under the Pension Rules can be ignored for the purpose
of consideration of invalid pension under r.39 of the Pension Rules
– Respondent’s husband retired  from service on the ground of mental
incapacity and died soon thereafter – His net qualifying service for
the benefits under the Pension Rules was 4 years 6 months and 29
days only – Respondent (widow of the employee) was paid gratuity
as also the other terminal benefits – After 14 years of death of the
employee, the respondent approached the Tribunal for fixation of
pay for her husband in the revised scale with effect from 1.1.1996
till his superannuation and also for family pension benefits –
Respondent never, however, prayed for invalid pension before the
Tribunal – Yet, Tribunal ordered for invalid pension for the
respondent’s husband, under r.39 – High Court upheld the order of
the Tribunal – On appeal, held:  Respondent was paid the service
gratuity and she received the same, without any demur – She never
raised any claim for invalid pension either at the time of retirement
or even when she approached the Tribunal i.e. 14 years later –
Nevertheless, the Tribunal went beyond the prayers in the O.A. and
ordered for invalid pension and then following his death, ordered
for family pension for the widow – In declaring such entitlement,
High Court and the Tribunal ignored the qualifying service of 10
years as prescribed in the Pension Rules –  Respondent’s husband
having not served for 10 years was not entitled for regular pension
– For the same reason, he cannot also be held entitled to invalid
pension.
Service Law: Pension – Invalid pension – Entitlement for –
Pension is earned by stint of continuity and longevity of service
 [2019] 14 S.C.R. 473
473
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
474
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 14 S.C.R.
and minimum qualifying service should, therefore, be understood
as the requirement for invalid pension as well – Pension Rules can
be harmoniously construed in this manner and in that event, there
shall be no clash between different provisions in the said Rules –
The condition of qualifying service prescribed in the Pension Rules
must be satisfied to become eligible for invalid pension – For those
with less than 10 years’ service, the Pension Rules provide for
gratuity payment and therefore, for invalid pension, qualifying years
of service, cannot be ignored – The different provisions of the
Pension Rules cannot be read in isolation and  must be construed
harmoniously and the requirement of qualifying service cannot be
said to be irrelevant for claiming different service benefits under
the same Rules – Service law – Orissa Civil Services (Pension) Rules,
1992.
Interpretation of statutes: Harmonious construction – Pension
Rules – Construction of – When the question arises as to how certain
provisions of the Pension Rules are to be understood, it is appropriate
to read the provision in its context which would mean reading the
statute as a whole – In other words, a particular provision of the
statute should be construed with reference to other provisions of
the same statute so as to construe the enactment as a whole – An
interpretation which involve conflict with two provisions of the same
statute should be avoided and effort should be made for harmonious
construction – The provision of a Rule cannot be used to defeat
another Rule unless it is impossible to effect reconciliation between
them – Orissa Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1992.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. The net qualifying service of respondent’s
husband for the benefits under the Pension Rules was 4 years 6
months and 29 days only. For government servants not completing
ten years qualifying service prescribed in Rule 47(5)(i) of the
Pension Rules, the service gratuity is to be paid at a uniform rate
of half month’s emolument for every completed six months period
of service. Such gratuity benefit as also the other terminal benefits
like GPF, unutilized Earned Leave, Death-cum-Retirement
Gratuity (DCRG), etc. were sanctioned and paid to the widow of
the employee. Moreover, respondent was also appointed as a
sweeper under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme and she is
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
475
in regular 

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