Additional pension accrues only upon completion of the prescribed age, not at its commencement.

The applicant, an 80-year-old retired Sub Post Master who retired on 30.06.2023, sought a 20% increase in his basic pension.

Under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, additional pension is granted to retirees aged 80 and above.

The applicant contended that this 20% increment should be granted upon the commencement of his 80th year (i.e., immediately after completing 79 years) rather than after completing the 80th year.

He relied on the Gauhati High Court’s decision in Virendera Dutt Gyani v. Union of India and a previous coordinate bench decision in Dr. S.M. Bose v. Union of India.

The respondents rejected his representation on 03.04.2023, maintaining that the benefit accrues only after the completion of 80 years.

Whether the additional quantum of pension @ 20% becomes admissible at the commencement of the 80th year of age or only after the completion of 80 years.

Rule 44(6) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, which provides for additional pension for retirees aged 80 years or above.

The jurisdictional precedent of the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in S.S. Bola v. State of Haryana, which interpreted the phrase "attaining the age" to mean the completion of the specified duration of years.

DOPT Office Memorandum dated 01.09.2008, which clarifies the calculation of additional pension upon attaining the age of 80.

The Supreme Court’s stay order in Union of India v. Bishnu Deo Ojha, which specified that respondents are entitled to additional pension from the date they reach the age of 80.

The Tribunal distinguished the Virendera Dutt Gyani case, noting it pertained to the High Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act, 1954, rather than the CCS (Pension) Rules governing the applicant.

Following the reasoning in Kartar Singh Tomar v. Union of India, the Tribunal held that "attaining" an age signifies the passing of that full time period.

A person completes age one only at the end of the 365th day; similarly, "attaining 80 years" implies the completion of 80 full years.

The Tribunal found the language of Rule 44(6) unambiguous, providing no scope for granting the benefit on the first day of the 80th year.

The Tribunal prioritized the binding nature of the jurisdictional High Court’s decision in S.S. Bola over the Gauhati High Court judgment.

The direct answer to the issue is that "attaining the age of 80" cannot be interpreted as "starting the 80th year".

Consequently, the Original Application was dismissed, and the respondents' rejection of the applicant's representation was held to be legally valid.

No costs were awarded.