Rajasthan High Court: In a petition filed by retired government employees challenging the period of restoration of full pension under Rule 29 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1996, a Division Bench of Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, CJ., and Bhuwan Goyal, J., suggested the State to form a Committee of Experts to evaluate the petitioners’ grievances and submit recommendations within six months.
The petitioners contended that according to Rule 29 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Commutation of Pension) Rules, full pension is restored after 14 years from the date of commutation. The petitioners contended that this provision results in financial loss and sought its reconsideration in light of the Fifth Pay Commission recommendations and precedent in Common Cause v. Union of India, (1987) 1 SCC 142. The petitioners argued that the 14-year restoration period is arbitrary and needed revision to ensure justice for pensioners.
However, the State contended that the matter falls under the domain of policy decisions of the State. It was contended that a similar challenge was rejected by the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Shila Devi v. State of Punjab, CWP No. 9426/2023, decided on 27-11-2024. It was contended that any modification to pension rules involves financial implications and requires a thorough policy review.
The Court acknowledged the petitioners’ concerns regarding the financial impact of the 14-year restoration period. The Court recognised that the instant issue involves policy considerations and financial implications, necessitating a broader examination by the State. The Court also noted that the State is willing to examine the policy, if representations are made.
Considering the nature of the issue and the affected class, i.e., retired employees, the Court suggested the State to constitute a Committee of Experts to review the pensioners’ grievances. The Court directed the Committee to submit its report within six months.
The Court disposed of the writ petitions while granting the petitioners liberty to file a fresh petition if their grievances remained unresolved after the Committee’s report.
[Rajasthan Sevanivrat Police Kalyan Sansthan v. State of Rajasthan, 2025 SCC OnLine Raj 411, decided on: 25-03-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. H.V. Nandwana Advocate with Mr. Premchand Sharma, Mr. Yashvardhan Nandwana, Mr. Anand Sharma and Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Counsel for the Petitioners
Mr. Rajendra Prasad Advocate General assisted by Ms. Harshita Thakral and Mr. Kartikey Sharma on behalf of Mr. Sandeep Taneja, Additional Advocate General, Counsel for the Respondents
