Retired Postal Officer’s Pension To Be Recalculated Using 10-Month Average That Counts APS Rank Pay: CAT Bengaluru

The applicant, a Department of Posts employee, served on deputation in the Army Postal Service (APS) from 1996 until his repatriation to his parent department in June 2025.

After his request for voluntary retirement while in APS was declined, he took voluntary retirement from the Department of Posts with effect from 31 July 2025.

His pension was sanctioned at 50% of his last basic pay in his substantive postal post—₹39,400 per month.

He contended that pension should instead be calculated under Rule 44(1) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021, using the more beneficial of last pay or average emoluments for the last ten months, including the relevant APS pay and rank pay.

The respondents maintained that pension was correctly calculated by reference to his substantive postal post and that the relevant APS quasi-substantive rank did not carry benefits on reversion to the parent cadre.

Rule 44(1) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 provides for pension at 50% of emoluments or average emoluments, whichever is more beneficial, subject to the prescribed limits; Rules 31 and 32 define emoluments and require average emoluments to be determined by reference to the last ten months of service.

The Department of Posts’ letter dated 13 December 1988 provides that rank pay drawn by Postal Officers as part of military pay while on deputation to APS during the last ten months before retirement is to be reckoned as pay for computing civil pension.

The Tribunal also considered the APS instructions and departmental memoranda concerning the applicant’s civil-service status and the treatment of quasi-substantive APS ranks on reversion.

The Tribunal treated the applicant’s claim as one for pension under the civil pension rules, not for benefits reserved to members of the Armed Forces or APS personnel.

It found that the 1988 Department of Posts letter had not been shown to have been withdrawn or superseded and that the respondents had not disputed the applicability of Rules 31, 32 and 44(1).

It distinguished the cited authorities, including Union of India v. Lt. Col. O.M. Dutt Sharma and Lt. Col. Shaji Joseph v. Union of India, because those cases concerned claims to armed-forces or ex-servicemen benefits, which the applicant had not sought.

The Tribunal therefore concluded that his pension calculation should be considered by reference to his average emoluments for the last ten months, applying the relevant rules and instructions.

It directed the respondents to consider fixation of the applicant’s pension under Rules 31, 32 and 44(1) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021, on the basis of the average emoluments drawn during the last ten months before retirement; thereafter, they were to issue a revised PPO and release pension benefits in accordance with the applicable rules.

The Tribunal did not itself direct payment of the claimed ₹69,550 per month; it ordered the respondents to carry out the calculation.

No costs were awarded.