9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (11) TMI 40X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ervices became effective. It also transpires that, subsequently, the Govt. of India revoked its earlier decision to abolish the pool by a notification dated October 13, 1977, but continued the earlier option given to the officers to be absorbed in public sector undertakings and then, on the officers reiterating the option, they were to be governed by the terms and conditions of the earlier notification. In the communication dated February 5, 1977, reference was made to the terminal benefits that the petitioner would be entitled to. Subsequently, the Under-Secretary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance, sent a communication dated December 28, 1977, to Pay and Accounts Officer, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi, whereby he conveyed the sanction of the President to the permanent absorption of the petitioner in the services of the Hindusthan Aeronautics Ltd., and that the absorption would take effect from the forenoon of April 1, 1977. In paras. (ii), (iii) and (iv) of that communication (Ex. B) details of the pension and gratuity that the petitioner would be eligible for were given. Clause (v), however, specified as follows: " (v) The officer will exercise an option, within six ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lected or deemed to have elected, and from such date as may be determined, in accordance with the orders of the Government applicable to him: Provided that no declaration regarding absorption in the public interest in a service or post in or under such corporation, company or body shall be required in respect of a Government servant whom the Government may, by order, declare to be a scientific employee: Provided further that the provisions of sub-rule (5) of rule 49 shall not apply for the purpose of determining pension under this rule." " 37-A. Payment of lump sum amount to persons on absorption in or under a corporation, company or body.-(1) Where a Government servant referred to in rule 37 elects the alternative of receiving the death-cum-retirement gratuity and a lump sum amount in lieu of pension, he shall, in addition to the death-cum-retirement gratuity, be granted: (a) on an application made in this behalf, a lump sum amount not exceeding the commuted value of one-third of his pension as may be admissible to him in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Pensions (Commutation) Rules; and (b) a terminal benefit equal to twice the amount of the lump sum ref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... argued that the petitioner would be person who was governed by the Civil Pensions (Commutation) Rules of the Central Govt. and, therefore, he would come within the first part of s. 10(10A) and, therefore, cannot claim exemption in regard to anything exceeding the amount payable on commutation of the pension which could be only to the extent of one-third under the said Commutation Rules. It is difficult to accept this submission. The Civil Pensions (Commutation) Rules make provision in regard to commutation of pension in r. 3 and 4. Rule 4 refers to certain schemes sanctioned by the Govt. of India in the official memorandum dated April 17, 1950, and a modification thereof in the official memorandum dated January 2, 1961, and specifies that Government servant shall be entitled to commute for a lump sum portion not exceeding one third of the pension that might be granted to him under the Rules. It further provides that such commutation shall be subject to the condition that the uncommuted residue of the pension shall not be less than Rs. 240 per annum. Rule 3 makes provision for persons who were not governed by the pension schemes referred to in r. 4. It provides that the Government ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as to compound for a single payment. In Jowitt's Dictionary of English Laze) the meaning given is " conversion of the right to receive a variable or periodical payment into the right to receive a fixed or gross payment ". The payments under subcls. (a) and (b) are together in lieu of the entire periodical payments. Different schemes may fix different extents to which commutation may be allowed. The mere circumstance that the extent of commutation was mentioned in the two sub-clauses does not alter the substance of the matter that the entire payment was in lieu of pension that is in commutation of pension. If as is clear the petitioner was governed by the scheme in regard to the payment in commutation of pension as found in r. 37A and the payment made to him is also in accordance with that rule, it cannot be contended that this payment is not under that scheme, but is a payment received under the Civil Pensions (Commutation) Rules of the Central Govt., i.e., under the first part of s. 10(10A) of the Act. Shri Rajasekhara Murthy, learned counsel for the department, sought to place reliance on the words in that section, namely, " such members or holders being persons not governed b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly received under the Commutation Rules, the relief would be limited to the extent of the amount receivable thereunder. So far as the several schemes are concerned, relief would be available to the extent the payment in commutation of pension would be received under those respective schemes. The relief or exemption provided in s. 10(10A) under such similar scheme cannot be restricted to the extent of the amount received in commutation of pension under the Civil Pensions (Commutation) Rules. If there is a scheme apart from the Civil Pensions (Commutation) Rules by which a person is governed, the operation of s. 10(10A) must extend to the amount received under that scheme by that person and cannot be limited under some other provision. Whenever such a limitation was intended, the legislature has made specific provision in that behalf. For example, in s. 10(10A)(ii) provision is made in respect of payment in commutation of pension received under any scheme of any other employer and the extent to which the amount would not be included in the computation of total income is restricted. The payment of Rs. 1,31,749.80 to the petitioner was received by him by virtue of a scheme which was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
