Authorities must decide the pensionary claim for five-year qualifying-service addition through a reasoned order.

The applicant, initially employed by the Fallah-i-Aam Trust, was appointed as a teacher in the J&K Education Department on 15 April 1991 and was allegedly regularised in 2004. He voluntarily retired on health grounds with effect from 1 August 2014, after approximately 24 years of service; the voluntary retirement was sanctioned by the competent authority in 2015.

The applicant claimed that his pension had been calculated at 42% of his basic pay, whereas, under Article 230 of the J&K Civil Service Regulations, he was entitled to pension calculated at 50% of basic pay together with an addition of five years to qualifying service.

The respondents contended that the grant of the five-year addition was within the domain of the appointing or competent administrative authority, and that the Accountant General could authorise pension only on the basis of an appropriate sanction or recommendation.

During arguments, the applicant agreed that the Tribunal could treat the petition and accompanying documents as a comprehensive representation and direct the respondents to decide it in accordance with law.

Whether the applicant was entitled to pension calculated at 50% of basic pay with the benefit of an additional five years of qualifying service under Article 230 of the J&K Civil Service Regulations?

Whether the respondents should be directed to consider the applicant’s petition and supporting documents as a comprehensive representation and pass a reasoned decision on his pension claim?

The Tribunal applied Article 230 of the J&K Civil Service Regulations, which governs the relevant pensionary entitlement and the possible addition of five years to qualifying service in cases of voluntary retirement, subject to the applicant’s eligibility and the sanction of the competent authority.

It further applied the administrative-law requirement that a competent authority deciding a statutory or pensionary claim must consider the applicable rules and pass a reasoned and speaking order.

The Accountant General, as the pension-authorising agency, could act on the basis of the sanction or recommendation of the competent administrative authority and was not treated as having independent authority to grant the additional service benefit.

The Tribunal did not adjudicate the applicant’s substantive entitlement to the claimed pension rate or the five-year addition.

Since the respondents maintained that the grant of the additional qualifying service depended upon a decision by the competent administrative authority, and the applicant accepted disposal of the matter by way of a comprehensive representation, the Tribunal considered it appropriate to remit the claim for administrative determination.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits, it directed the respondents to consider the petition, annexures and any earlier representations under the applicable statutory provisions and legal framework, subject to the applicant’s eligibility and the absence of any legal impediment.

It directed the respondents to treat the petition and accompanying material as a comprehensive representation, consider the applicant’s claim in accordance with law, and pass a reasoned and speaking order within eight weeks from the date of service of a certified copy of the order and the T.A.

The connected miscellaneous applications, if any, were also disposed of.