Chairman/Member Of Cooperative Tribunal Entitled To Revised Pension After Deduction Of Parent Service Benefits: Uttarakhand HC

Background Facts

The petitioner, an IAS officer (parent service) superannuated from service on 31.10.2008, while the Additional Registrar, (parent service) Cooperative Societies retired on 30.11.2010. Both possessed the requisite qualifications for appointment as Members of the Uttarakhand Cooperative Tribunal. Therefore, the IAS officer (petitioner no.1) and Additional Registrar (petitioner no.2) were appointed as Member on 26.10.2010 and 07.01.2011 respectively. They discharged their duties as Members till the age of 66 years. Thereafter, petitioner no.1 retired on 30.10.2014 and petitioner no.2 retired on 30.11.2016.

The petitioners asked for revision and recalculation of pension, gratuity, and other post-retiral benefits for the services rendered by them as Members of the Cooperative Tribunal under Rule 271(ii) and Rule 272(4) of the Uttarakhand Cooperative Societies Rules, 2004. But their requests weren't heard upon. Their representations were recommended by the Chairman of the Cooperative Tribunal and forwarded to the State Government. Thereafter, the matter was referred to the Finance Department. The Finance Department came to the conclusion that Rules made in this regard in Uttarakhand Cooperative Societies Rules, 2004 were similar to Rule 253/254(4) of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Rules. The finance did not dispute the entitlement of the petitioners. However, the Department held that the Rules need to be amended.

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the writ petition seeking direction to the respondents to revise their pension, gratuity, and other benefits.

It was submitted by the petitioners that the revision of their pension, gratuity, and other post-retiral benefits was mandated under under Rule 271(ii) and Rule 272(4) of the Uttarakhand Cooperative Societies Rules, 2004. The petitioners further contended that a person retiring from the post of Chairman or Member of the Tribunal shall be entitled to additional pension and gratuity, which must be recalculated as if he had never retired from his parent service, after deducting the amount already paid.

It was contended that proviso (4) of Rule 272 of Uttarakhand Cooperative Societies Rules, 2004, provides that every person appointed to the Tribunal as the Chairman or a Member shall be entitled to pension and gratuity as per rules applicable to Group 'A' Officer of the State Government. It was further submitted that similar provisions under Rules 253 and 254 of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Rules have been implemented in the State of Uttar Pradesh.

On the other hand, it was submitted by the State that Rule 271 of the Uttarakhand Cooperative Societies Rules, 2004 applies only to those persons who had joined as Members of the Cooperative Tribunal prior to their superannuation from the parent service. It did not apply to those who were reappointed after retirement. It was stated that the petitioners had already retired from their respective departments before joining the Tribunal, therefore, they cannot claim recalculation of pension under the rule.

Findings of the Court

It was observed by the court that proviso (ii) of Rule 271 of the Uttarakhand Cooperative Societies Rules, 2004 provides that a person retiring from the post of Chairman or Member of the Cooperative Tribunal shall be entitled to additional pension, gratuity and post-retirement leave encashment, which shall be recalculated as if he had never retired from his parent service and after deducting the amount already paid. Also that the proviso (4) of Rule 272 states that every person appointed as Chairman or Member shall be entitled to pension and gratuity as applicable to Group 'A' Officers of the State Government.

It was held by the court that that the petitioners were entitled to revised pension. Further it was held that the services rendered by them as Members of the Cooperative Tribunal should be taken into account for recalculating their pension and other retiral benefits. It was held that benefits should be recalculated w.r.t proviso (ii) of Rule 271 of Uttarakhand Cooperative Societies Rules, 2004, within a period of 12 weeks.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition was disposed of.

Case Name : Tarkendra Vaishnav and another vs State of Uttarakhand and another

Case No. : Writ Petition (S/B) No.259 Of 2019

Counsel for the Petitioners : Sandeep Kothari

Counsel for the Respondent : P.S. Bisht, Addl. C.S.C.