C.W.P. No.17658 of 1997 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.17658 of 1997 Date of Decision: 13.01.2010 Jain Kishan Lal Goel (through LRs) ....Petitioner Versus Punjab National Bank through its General Manager and others ....Respondents Present: Mr. Rajinder Goel, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. D.K. Singal, Advocate for the respondents. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? Yes 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes ` -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks for re-fixation of pension as Rs.2390/- per month w.e.f. 01.11.1993 as per the Punjab National Bank (Employees) Pension Regulations, 1995. The contention was that the pension which was to be fixed on the basis of the average emoluments drawn in the last 10 months of his service in the Bank would in the matter of calculation take the pay as including "stagnation increments" as well. The pension, however, had been calculated only on the basis of the basic pay without including the stagnation increments. The petitioner gives out a memo of calculation in paragraph 6 detailing the basic pay and the stagnation allowances and contends that by proper reckoning the C.W.P. No.17658 of 1997 -2- pension that would become payable would be only Rs.2205/-. 2. The contention on behalf of the Bank is that the pay cannot include the stagnation allowances for if it was not to be reckoned for contribution to Provident Fund, the pension that was already granted to him was in order. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has adverted to the text of the regulation in the replication, which sets out the definition of "average emoluments" and pay as follows:- “2. Definition: In these regulations, unless the context otherwise requires:- (d) “average emoluments” means the average of the pay drawn by an employee during the last ten months of his service in the Bank;” “(s) “pay” includes, - (a) in relation to an employee who has either retired or died on or after the 1st day of January, 1986 but before the 1st day of November, 1993,- (i) the basic pay including stagnation increments, if any, and (ii) all allowances counted for the purposes of making contribution to the Provident Fund and for the payment of dearness allowance;” Regulation 35, which sets out the amount of pension that is C.W.P. No.17658 of 1997 -3- payable sets out clause 2 as follows: “2) In the case of an employee retiring in accordance with the provisions of the Service Regulations or Settlement after completing a qualifying service of not less than thirty years the amount of basic pension shall be calculated as fifty per cent of the average emoluments.” 4. The crucial definition, therefore, would be only with reference to the average emoluments, which refers to the average pay and if pay includes a stagnation allowance by virtue of the definition in Clause 2(s), inevitably, the pension has to be worked out only by adding the stagnation increment along with the basic pay. The contention of the petitioner is, therefore, well founded and the petitioner is entitled to have the pension re-worked by including the stagnation increment along with basic pay which shall be Rs.2205/- with interest @6% per annum. This shall be effective from 01.11.1993 and the same basis shall be maintained throughout for reckoning the pension. The exercise of re-working the pension shall be undertaken forthwith within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. 5. The writ petition is allowed in the above terms. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE January 13, 2010 Pankaj* C.W.P. No.17658 of 1997 -4-