Calcutta High Court Overturns Tribunal Decision: Technical Resignation Benefits Restored for Government Servant Court Rules in Favor of Shri D. Ganapathi Rao, Affording Him Eligibility Under Old Pension Scheme After Liberal Interpretation of Procedural Terms
In a landmark judgment, the Calcutta High Court, Circuit Bench at Port Blair, has overturned a decision by the Central Administrative Tribunal, granting Shri D. Ganapathi Rao the benefits of past service under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972. The case, presided over by Justices Hiranmay Bhattacharyya and Shampa Dutt (Paul), concerned the interpretation of "technical resignation" as per an Office Memorandum dated August 17, 2016.
The petitioner, Shri D. Ganapathi Rao, initially joined as a Peon with the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, after applying for the position prior to the introduction of the National Pension Scheme (NPS). Shortly thereafter, he resigned from his post to accept a new position as a Primary School Teacher, without initially notifying his former department about his application for the teaching role, as required by procedural norms.
The Tribunal had previously dismissed Rao's application, citing non-compliance with procedural requirements for technical resignation, thereby denying him eligibility under the Old Pension Scheme. However, the High Court has now set aside this decision, emphasizing that procedural terms should be interpreted liberally to favor government servants, aligning with beneficial provisions.
Justice Bhattacharyya, delivering the judgment, highlighted that the term "immediately" should be construed as "within a reasonable period of time," thereby accommodating Rao's circumstances. The judgment underscored that procedural defects should not be punitive but rather serve justice, in line with a precedent set by the Supreme Court.
The Court directed the respondent authorities to reassess Rao's eligibility for coverage under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, taking into account his past service as a Peon and the beneficial nature of the administrative instructions.
Rao's advocate, Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar, successfully argued that the petitioner had exercised his option within the stipulated time frame, and his resignation should be deemed technical, allowing for the continuity of pension benefits. The Court's decision is a significant victory for Rao and sets a precedent for the interpretation of administrative instructions concerning government servants.
Bottom Line:
Government Servants - Interpretation of "Technical Resignation" under Office Memorandum dated August 17, 2016 - Liberal construction of the term "immediately" in the context of procedural requirements - Beneficial provisions of administrative instructions must lean in favor of government servants.
Statutory provision(s): Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, Office Memorandum dated August 17, 2016, Office Memorandum dated March 03, 2023.
