Courts cannot relax prescribed minimum qualifying pension service beyond permissible rounding limits.

R. Kaliaperumal, an employee in the Group ‘D’ category, claimed pensionary benefits after completing 9 years and 4 months of qualifying service.

The Department of Posts rejected his claim by order dated 25 November 2020, holding that he had not completed the minimum qualifying service prescribed under the CCS Pension Rules.

The rejection followed consideration of whether the shortfall in qualifying service could be relaxed pursuant to the Supreme Court’s order dated 8 November 2019.

Kaliaperumal challenged the departmental order before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, in O.A. No. 605 of 2021.

The Tribunal allowed the application by order dated 29 May 2023, which was challenged by the Union of India and departmental authorities in the present writ petition.

Whether an employee who had completed 9 years and 4 months of qualifying service was entitled to pension despite not completing the prescribed minimum qualifying service of 10 years.

Whether the shortfall of eight months could be relaxed by invoking the Government’s power of relaxation under Rule 88 of the CCS Pension Rules, 1972.

Whether the Central Administrative Tribunal was justified in directing pensionary relief by relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Union of India v. Gandiba Behera [(2021) 14 SCC 786].

The Court applied the CCS Pension Rules, under which 10 years of qualifying service is ordinarily required for grant of pension.

It recognised the applicable rule permitting a shortfall of up to three months to be rounded off to one year for pensionary purposes, but held that an eight-month shortfall exceeded that permissible limit.

The Court also considered Rule 88 of the CCS Pension Rules, 1972, which confers a power upon the Government to relax the operation of the Rules in appropriate cases; such power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and only where gross injustice or miscarriage of justice is established.

Relying on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Union of India & Others v. Gandiba Behera, (2021) 14 SCC 786, the Court held that the decision in that case, rendered on different facts, could not be mechanically applied to every case involving a shortfall in qualifying service.

The Court further held that pension, although constitutionally recognised as a right, remains governed by the applicable statutory pension scheme and rules.

The Court held that Kaliaperumal had completed only 9 years and 4 months of qualifying service, leaving a shortfall of eight months, which was substantially beyond the permissible three-month rounding-off limit.

Although the Government possessed a power of relaxation under Rule 88, the Court emphasised that such power belonged primarily to the executive and was not capable of being exercised by the High Court in judicial review merely to confer an individual benefit.

Relaxing the requirement in this case could have wider financial and administrative consequences by encouraging similar claims from employees across the country.

The Court found that the Tribunal had failed to properly appreciate the limited factual and legal scope of Gandiba Behera and had incorrectly extended its reasoning to the present case.

Consequently, the Tribunal’s order granting relief could not be sustained.

It held that completion of 9 years and 4 months of service did not satisfy the minimum 10-year qualifying-service requirement and that the eight-month shortfall could not be judicially relaxed.

The order dated 29 May 2023 in O.A. No. 605 of 2021 was set aside.

The writ petition was allowed, without costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.