# Dinesh Chandra Verma v. State of U.P. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2023) 7 ILRA 1267
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2023-07-18
- **Case number:** Writ A No. 18675 of 2020
- **Bench:** Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, Om Prakash Shukla
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/dinesh-chandra-verma-v-state-of-u-p-ors-50366
- **Pages:** 5

## Headnote

C.S.C., A.S.G., Gaurav Mehrotra

Service
Benefits
-
Domestic
Help
Allowance - Entitlement of retired ViceChairman, Central Administrative Tribunal
(CAT) Rules, 1985 - Rule 15-A - Parity
with retired High Court Judges -Mandate
is statutory and binding
Rule 15-A of the Central Administrative Tribunal
(Salaries and Allowances and Conditions of
Service
of
Chairman,
Vice-Chairman
and
Members) Rules, 1985 provides that the
conditions of service and perquisites of the
Chairman and Vice-Chairman shall be the same
as those of a serving High Court Judge under
the High Court Judges (Conditions of Service)
Act, 1954 and the High Court Judges (Travelling
Allowances) Rules, 1956. Retirement benefits
including Domestic Help Allowance fall within
the ambit of "pension" under Section 2(gg) of
the 1954 Act, which includes not only pecuniary
pension but also any retirement benefit.Thus,
denial of Domestic Help Allowance to a retired
Vice-Chairman of CAT, who earlier served in
U.P. District Judiciary and was receiving such
allowance
post-retirement
until
2007,
is
arbitrary and violative of statutory mandate.
Petitioner entitled to Domestic Help Allowance
with periodical revision. St. directed to make
payment of arrears within two months, without
interest.

List of Cases cited:

Devendra Kumar Agarwal Vs U.O.I., 102 (2003)
DLT 461

## Text

7 All. Dinesh Chandra Verma Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
1267
that the appellant would be entitled to full
benefits of promotions as is extended to
those who do not suffer from HIV Positive.
All the directions and orders impugned in
the present case which denied or deprived
the appellant the chance or right to occupy
the promotional posts are hereby quashed.
The respondents are directed to issue
consequential orders with effect from the
date the appellant's junior(s) were/was
promoted.

(67) The appeal is allowed in the
aforesaid terms.

(68) There shall be no orders as to
cost.
----------
(2023) 7 ILRA 1267
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 18.07.2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE DEVENDRA KUMAR
UPADHYAYA, J
THE HON'BLE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J.

Writ A No. 18675 of 2020

Dinesh Chandra Verma ...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondent

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Shireesh Kumar

Counsel for the Respondent:
C.S.C., A.S.G., Gaurav Mehrotra

Service
Benefits
-
Domestic
Help
Allowance - Entitlement of retired ViceChairman, Central Administrative Tribunal
(CAT) Rules, 1985 - Rule 15-A - Parity
with retired High Court Judges -Mandate
is statutory and binding
Rule 15-A of the Central Administrative Tribunal
(Salaries and Allowances and Conditions of
Service
of
Chairman,
Vice-Chairman
and
Members) Rules, 1985 provides that the
conditions of service and perquisites of the
Chairman and Vice-Chairman shall be the same
as those of a serving High Court Judge under
the High Court Judges (Conditions of Service)
Act, 1954 and the High Court Judges (Travelling
Allowances) Rules, 1956. Retirement benefits
including Domestic Help Allowance fall within
the ambit of "pension" under Section 2(gg) of
the 1954 Act, which includes not only pecuniary
pension but also any retirement benefit.Thus,
denial of Domestic Help Allowance to a retired
Vice-Chairman of CAT, who earlier served in
U.P. District Judiciary and was receiving such
allowance
post-retirement
until
2007,
is
arbitrary and violative of statutory mandate.
Petitioner entitled to Domestic Help Allowance
with periodical revision. St. directed to make
payment of arrears within two months, without
interest.

List of Cases cited:

Devendra Kumar Agarwal Vs U.O.I., 102 (2003)
DLT 461

(Delivered by Hon'ble Devendra Kumar
Upadhyaya, J.
&
Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla, J.)

1. Heard Sri Shireesh Kumar, learned
counsel for petitioner, Sri Shailendra
Kumar Singh, learned Chief Standing
Counsel and Sri Prakhar Mishra for the
State-respondents, Sri Gaurav Mehrotra,
learned counsel representing the High
Court of Judicature at Allahabad and Sri
Dev Rishi Kumar, learned counsel for
Union of India.

2. Jurisdiction of this Court under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India has
been invoked by the petitioner, who is a
retired
Vice
Chairman
of
Central
Administrative
Tribunal,
a
statutory
1268 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
tribunal created under the Administrative
Tribunal Act, 1985, to challenge the order
dated 26.12.2019, passed by the State
Government whereby his representation
claiming the benefit of Domestic Help
Allowance has been rejected. A further
prayer has been made by the petitioner that
a direction be issued to the respondents to
pay the said allowance in accordance with
the provisions contained in the Government
Order dated 20.04.1999 with effect from
01.03.2008 along with periodical revisions
and arrears with interest at the rate of 12%.

3. The impugned order dated
26.12.2019 rejecting the representation of
the petitioner in respect of his claim was
passed in compliance of the order dated
03.07.2019 passed by a coordinate Bench
of this Court in Writ Petition No.29103
(S/B) of 2017 as corrected vide order dated
31.07.2019.

4. By the said order the coordinate
Bench of this Court while setting aside the
order dated 09.08.2017 directed the State
Government in the Department of Law and
Justice to reconsider and decide the claim
of the petitioner in the light of Government
Order
dated
05.04.2007,
Office
Memorandum dated 21.02.2003 as well as
Rule 15-A of the Central Administrative
Tribunal (Salaries and Allowances and
Conditions of Service of Chairman, ViceChairman and Members) Rules, 1985
(hereinafter referred to as 'Rules, 1985').

5. The petitioner has been a Member
of district judiciary in the State of U.P. and
while working on the post of District
Judge, he took voluntary retirement and on
selection joined as a Member of Central
Administrative Tribunal. He, subsequently,
was appointed as Vice-Chairman of the said
Tribunal and retired on 22.05.2005 from
the post of Vice-Chairman. Initially, after
his retirement, he was paid the Domestic
Help Allowance till 31.12.2007, however,
for subsequent quarters he was not paid this
allowance and accordingly agitated his
matter with the authorities. He also invoked
the jurisdiction of this Court and instituted
writ petition, namely, Writ Petition No.
29103 (S/B) of 2017, which as observed
above, was decided with a direction to the
State Government in the Department of
Law and Justice to reconsider his claim.
The said claim has, however, been denied
to him by the State Government by passing
the order dated 26.12.2019 which is under
challenge before us in this writ petition.

6. Rules, 1985 have been framed in
exercise of the powers conferred by Section
35 (2) (c) of the Administrative Tribunal
Act, 1985 by the Central Government and
as such these Rules have binding force
being statutory in nature. The said Rules
have
been
framed
by
the
Central
Government for regulating the salaries and
allowances and conditions of service of the
Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Members of
the
Central
Administrative
Tribunal.
According to Rule 15-A, the conditions of
service and other perquisites available to
the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the
Central Administrative Tribunal shall be the
same as admissible to a serving Judge of a
High Court as contained in the High Court
Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954
(hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 1954') and
High Court Judges (Travelling Allowances)
Rules, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as
'Rules, 1956'). Rule 15-A of Rules 1985 is
extracted herein below:-

"15-A.
Notwithstanding
anything contained in Rule 4 to 15 of the
said rules, the conditions of service and
other
perquisites
available
to
the
7 All. Dinesh Chandra Verma Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
1269
Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the
Central Administrative Tribunal shall be
the same as admissible to a serving Judge
of a High Court as contained in the High
Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act,
1954 and High Court Judges (Travelling
Allowances) Rules, 1956 "

7. A bare perusal of afore-quoted Rule
15-A of the Rules 1985 makes it
abundantly clear that conditions of service
and other perquisites to Chairman and
Vice-Chairman of Tribunal is to be the
same as are admissible to Judges of High
Courts in terms of the provisions contained
in Act, 1954.

8. The Parliament for the purpose of
regulating certain conditions of service of
Judges of High Courts has enacted Act,
1954. Section 2 of the said Act contains
definition clause and according to section 2
(gg), 'pension' has been defined to mean
pension of any kind whatsoever payable to
or in respect of a Judge and includes any
gratuity or other sum or sums so payable by
way of death or retirement benefits. Section
2 (gg) of Act 1954 is extracted herein
below:-

"2(gg)
'pension'
means
a
pension of any kind whatsoever payable to
or in respect of a Judge, and includes any
gratuity or other sum or sums so payable
by way of death or retirement benefits."

9. Thus, it is clear from a perusal of
the definition of the expression 'pension' as
occurring in Section 2(gg) of Act 1954 that
pension does not mean the pension of any
kind alone payable in respect of a Judge but
it also includes gratuity or other sum or
sums payable by way of death or retirement
benefits. Thus, if any sum is payable to a
Judge of High Court by way of retirement
benefits, such sum will also be included in
the definition of the expression 'pension'.

10. It is not denied at the bar that a
High Court Judge after retirement is
entitled to the Domestic Help Allowance.
As per mandate of Rule 15-A of Rules
1985, the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of
the Central Administrative Tribunal are also
entitled to perquisites available to a High
Court Judge as contained in Act, 1954.

11. Since the definition of the
expression
'pension'
as
occurring
in
Section 2(gg) of Act, 1954 includes any
sum payable by way of retirement benefits
as well, in our opinion, we have no doubt
that in case any retirement benefit is
available to a retired High Court Judge, the
same shall also be available to the
Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the
Central Administrative Tribunal.

12. As already observed above, Rule
15-A is statutory in nature and, thus, the
said Rule binds all concerned.

13. It is also to be noticed that in Rule
15-A of Rules 1985, the word to be taken
note of is "shall" which occurs therein and
accordingly it is mandatory. Thus, mandate
of Rules 1985 is that the conditions of
service and other perquisites as available to
a Judge of High Court shall be made
available to the Chairman and ViceChairman of the Central Administrative
Tribunal as well. The very mandatory
nature of the language occurring in Rule
15-A makes it obligatory on the part of
respondents to make available all the
perquisites which, in our opinion, shall
include the Domestic Help Allowance as
well. The benefit of Domestic Help
Allowance is, in fact, a retirement benefit
and hence it will be included in the
1270 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
expression
'pension'
as
occurring
in
Section 2(gg) of Act 1954.

14.
 Apart
from
the
aforesaid
discussion, we may also notice certain
other facts which strengthen the case of the
petitioner.

15. Hon'ble High Court of Judicature
at
Allahabad
vide
its
letter
dated
07.08.2014 as is available in annexure
no.11 to the writ petition, has already made
a recommendation to grant the claim of the
petitioner to the State Government.

16. We may also refer to a judgment
of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case
of Mr Devendra Kumar Agarwal vs.
Union of India, reported in 102 (2003)
DLT 461. Certain claims were made by the
petitioner in the said case, who also had
retired as Vice-Chairman of the Central
Administrative Tribunal. Hon'ble High
Court of Delhi by means of judgment
rendered in the said case on 07.11.2002
held that grant of pension in terms of Rule
15-A of Rules 1985 and service conditions
have to be applied to the petitioner of the
said case and his pension is to be
determined in accordance with the Part- III
of First Schedule to Act 1954.

17. In compliance of the said
judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi,
a letter was issued by the Government of
India in the Ministry of Personnel, Public
Grievances and Pensions, Department of
Personnel and Training on 21.02.2003 for
implementation of the said judgment dated
07.11.2002.
The
State
Government
thereafter vide its office order dated
12.11.2009 has provided the benefit of
pension in compliance of judgment of
Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and has also
provided the benefit of Domestic Help
Allowance to said Sri D.K.Agarwal.

18. It is also to be noticed that Sri
D.K.Agarwal
prior
to
appointed
as
Chairman, had also served the district
judiciary in the State of U.P. and he had
retired as District Judge.

19. The case of the petitioner herein,
thus, stands on the similar footing with that
of Sri D.K.Agarwal and accordingly we do
not see any reason, whatsoever, as to why
the benefits which have been made
available to Sri D.K.Agarwal can be denied
to the petitioner in this case.

20. As noticed above, the Government
of India in its letter dated 21.02.2003 which
was issued for ensuring compliance of the
judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi,
dated 07.11.2002 in the matter of Sri
D.K.Agarwal,
has
requested
that
pensionary benefits in respect of said ViceChairmen of the Central Administrative
Tribunal, who prior to his appointment in
the Tribunal have held any pensionable
post under the Union of India or the State,
be revised in the manner provided in Act
1954.

21. For all the aforesaid reasons, we
are of the considered opinion that the
petitioner is also entitled to Domestic Help
Allowance.

22. Coming to the reasons indicated
in the order dated 26.12.2019, passed by
the State Government whereby the benefit
being claimed by the petitioner has been
denied, we may notice that the State
Government has stated in the said order
that in respect of pension the clear
provision is not available in Rules 1956,
7 All. Union Bank of India Vs. A.D.M., Meerut & Ors.
1271
namely, High Court Judges (Travelling
Allowances) Rules, 1956.

23. The reason given in the impugned
order further is that since the said Rules
1956 do not make any provision for
pensionary
benefits/domestic
help
allowance, as such the petitioner is not
entitled to his claim. Another reason
assigned by the State Government while
passing the impugned order is that on the
basis of parity any pensioner can lay any
claim only under statutory rules and not
otherwise. The aforesaid reasons indicated
by the State Government while passing the
impugned order dated 26.12.2019 are
absolutely untenable and fallacious for the
reason that the statutory provision where
the petitioner can trace his claim for
payment of domestic help allowance is
available in Rule 15-A of Rules 1985 which
clearly mandates that conditions of service
and other perquisites shall be made
available to the Chairman and ViceChairman of the Central Administrative
Tribunal as are admissible to a Judge of a
High Court in terms of the provisions
contained in Act, 1954. We have already
noticed the definition of the expression
'pension' as occurring in Section 2(gg) of
Act, 1954 which includes not only
pecuniary pension but also other retirement
benefits. Accordingly, if any retirement
benefits such as benefit of Domestic Help
Allowance has been made available to a
retired High Court Judge in terms of the
provisions contained in Act, 1954, the same
shall be made available to a retired
Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the
Central Administrative Tribunal as well.

24. For the discussion made and
reasons given above, we are unable to find
ourselves in agreement with the reasons
assigned by the State Government while
rejecting the claim of the petitioner by
means of the order dated 26.12.2019.

25. Resultantly, the writ petition is
allowed and the impugned order dated
26.12.2019,
passed
by
the
State
Government, as is contained in annexure
no.15 to the writ petition, is hereby
quashed. A direction is issued to the
concerned respondent to make available the
benefit of Domestic Help Allowance to the
petitioner with effect from 01.03.2008
along with periodical revision, if any,
within a month from today. He shall also be
paid arrears of the said allowance within
next two months. However, in the facts and
circumstances of the case, he shall not be
entitled to payment of interest.

26. This order shall be communicated
by learned Chief Standing Counsel to all
concerned forthwith.

27. There shall be no order as to costs.
----------
(2023) 7 ILRA 1271
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 30.05.2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR BIRLA, J.
THE HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.

Civil Misc. Review Application No. 293 of 2021
IN
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 9803 of 2021

Union Bank of India ...Petitioner
Versus
A.D.M., Meerut & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Suresh Chandra Pandey

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C., Sri Anjani Kumar Chaurasiya