Court says pension benefits for upgraded posts can be granted even after retirement of employee
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has directed the authorities to revise the pension of a retired Inspector General of Police (IGP), B.S. Danewalia, based on the upgraded pay scale of the Director-General of Police (DGP) position. The Court’s ruling ensures that even though Danewalia retired prematurely, he is entitled to the pension benefits of the higher-ranking post that was introduced after his retirement.
Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Sudeepti Sharma, in their judgment, emphasized that officers who retire from a post before it is upgraded are still entitled to the benefits associated with the new, upgraded position. They stated, “Even when any officer is appointed to an ex-cadre post, they are entitled to the equivalent pay, perks, and status of the cadre post.”
The case dates back to 1980, when B.S. Danewalia, serving as the Inspector-General of Police, was transferred to a non-cadre position following the dismissal of the Akali government in Punjab. Danewalia chose to retire prematurely on June 5, 1980, just before a major shift in the Punjab police system.
In 1982, two years after Danewalia’s retirement, the Punjab government created the position of Director-General of Police, which was an upgrade from the position of Inspector-General. This change took effect on July 16, 1982, and a junior officer to Danewalia was appointed to the new position.
Danewalia argued that had he not retired prematurely, he would have been the first officer to assume the role of Director-General of Police when he reached the normal retirement age of 58 in 1983. He contended that this would have entitled him to the higher pay scale and benefits associated with the upgraded position.
The Court, after reviewing the case and citing a previous ruling (Agia Ram vs. Union of India, 2012), agreed with Danewalia’s argument. The judges noted that even though he had taken premature retirement, he should have been entitled to the benefits of the upgraded position if he had retired at the normal age. The Court ruled that the benefits of the upgraded post should not be denied to someone who had previously held the lower-ranking post.
As a result, the Court allowed the appeal and ordered the authorities to re-calculate Danewalia’s pension based on the DGP pay scale, effective from January 1, 1986. Additionally, the Court instructed that the revised pension be paid with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.
The case, titled B.S. Danewalia (since deceased) through LR v. State of Punjab and Ors, was represented by Senior Advocate Rajiv Atma Ram and Advocate Sandeep Kumar for the appellant, while Senior Deputy Advocate General Maninder Singh represented the State of Punjab. The citation for the case is 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 411.
