A single-judge bench of Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri was hearing a petition filed by the wife of the clerk. It was filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the letter dated April 10, 2013, and recovery letter dated December 6, 2013, whereby the pension of the husband of the petitioner (wife of the clerk) had been reduced by the Corporation and an amount of Rs 5,65,524 was sought to be recovered from him. The petitioner asked the Corporation he had worked for to release the full pension of her husband along with interest.
The clerk was working as a chowkidar in the Corporation and was promoted to the post of Lower Division Clerk (LDC) on September 15, 1989. There was a condition under the rules that a person who is promoted has to pass a typing test within a specific period. The clerk was informed with regard to the passing of the typing test. He sought exemption, but neither did he pass the typing test nor any exemption was granted to him, and ultimately the clerk retired on October 31, 2012.
After his retirement, the chief engineer wrote a letter to the clerk on April 10, 2013, directing him to pass the mandatory typing test within a period of three months otherwise he will be reverted to the post of chowkidar. Thereafter, after the retirement of the clerk, his pension and pensionary benefits were refixed on the basis of the reversion, although the order of reversion was not on record and he was paid the pensionary benefits for the post of chowkidar. Unfortunately, the clerk died on April 29, 2018, and thereafter, family pension and other benefits of the petitioner, who is a widow, were also fixed on the basis of the salary of her husband as chowkidar.
The Court noted that it is a case where a widow has knocked the doors of the Court by filing the petition by raising a grievance that after her husband retired as LDC, the Corporation had issued a letter to her husband directing him to pass the mandatory typing test otherwise he will be reverted, and thereafter, he was actually reverted after his retirement because of non-passing of the typing test and his pension and pensionary benefits were refixed to that of the post of chowkidar, and thereafter, when he died on April 29, 2018, the family pension and other benefits were given to his widowed wife based on the post of the chowkidar.
The Court observed that when the husband of the petitioner was in service, although there might have been a provision for passing the typing test for the purpose of getting promotion or even after the promotion within the time limit otherwise as per the rules, he might have been reverted, but it is a case where the husband of the petitioner was never reverted while he was in service and he retired as LDC. Thereafter, it is very strange and shocking to read the language of the letter which has been issued by an officer of the rank of chief engineer wherein he directed the petitioner to pass the typing test after his retirement, otherwise he will be reverted, and thereafter, he was actually reverted although there is no order of reversion on record, but it is an admitted position. Thereafter, the entire benefits were recalculated to that of the post of chowkidar.
The Court further said that it is a settled law that after the retirement of an employee, the master and servant relationship ceases to operate. If any action is required to be taken after the retirement of an ex-employee, then the same can always be taken when there is an express authority of law and provision of law. In other words, an action can be taken against a retired employee only when the law permits to do so in a particular fashion, but not in such an arbitrary and capricious manner. When there is no provision of law or no authority of law or such kind of reversion being made after the retirement and directing the retired employee to pass a typing test, the action of the government authorities is arbitrary, ex facie illegal.
The Court also observed that this is a case where a widow had to knock the doors of the Court for the purpose of enforcement of not only her statutory rights, but also her Constitutional rights envisaged under Article 300-A of the Constitution. The action of the Corporation is absolutely arbitrary and shocking and ex facie illegal.
The Court directed the Corporation to refix the pension and all the pensionary benefits, starting from the time when the clerk had retired from the post of LDC and to grant all the consequential benefits to the petitioner, who is his widow, with regard to the benefits which the clerk was entitled as LDC along with interest @ 6% per annum within a period of three months. Similarly, the family pension and pensionary benefits and other retiral benefits of the petitioner shall also be refixed on the basis of his retirement from the post of LDC.
—By Adarsh Kumar and India Legal Bureau