Central Administrative Tribunal directs Centre to refix pension of pre-2006 retirees

  • HT Correspondent, Hindustan Times
  • Updated: Jan 06, 2015 14:58 IST

Giving the PGIMER faculty a reason to cheer, the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has directed the Centre to pay non practising allowance (NPA) to the faculty members of the institute retiring before 2006 and also refix the pension amount being paid to them.

Disposing of an application filed by 42 former faculty members of the PGIMER, including for mer directors and deans of the institute, the tribunal on December 30 last year, had granted four months time to PGIMER to refix the pension.

The tribunal held, “PGIMER being an autonomous institution will initiate the process of obtaining necessary approvals from the competent authority for refixation of pension of the applicants in accordance with the Supreme Court order issued in November 2013 , if not done so far. The exercise of refixation of applicants’ pension may be completed within a period of four months and the beneficiaries be informed.”

The Sixth Pay Commission in its report implemented the continued payment of NPA to all medical faculty of the institute.

The ministry of personnel of the central government in October 14, 2008, first ordered for the payment of NPA to all medical faculty of PGI, Chandigarh, but subsequently in 2009 stopped the payment to all those retiring before 2006 but continued paying NPA to all the faculty members retiring after 2006.

This practice brought in a gross disparity in the pension amounts being paid to the same class of employees just because of the date of retirement which was in violation of the directives of the apex court and CAT’s principal bench, Delhi.

Following this, 42 former faculty members of the PGI had filed an application in the CAT, Chandigarh, which was disposed of by the tribunal on March 28, 2012, saying that the applicants are entitled to be paid the NPA.

Despite directives, the central gover nment did nothing in this regard and so the applicants filed a contempt of case in the Punjab and Haryana high court which again referred the case to CAT for review.

also read

HT Report Card: Nothing ventured, nothing gained
Show comments