CWP No. 20157 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: 13.8.2010 Ratti Ram ...Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana & Others ...Respondents CORAM HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI PRESENT: Mr.K.L.Dhingra, Advocate Mr.RS Kundu, Addl.A.G., Haryana Mr.Parveen Gupta, Advocate Permod Kohli, J. (Oral) Keeping in view the controversy involved and with the consent of the counsel, this petition is disposed of at motion stage. The petitioner joined the Haryana State Electricity Board, now known as Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited as Assistant Lineman. He was promoted as Assistant Foreman on 10.3.1988 and retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 20.2.2004. The petitioner, while in service, adopted small family norms for which he was granted benefit of special increments in the form of special pay as an incentive which was provided by the government of Haryana to its employees for adopting small family CWP No. 20157 of 2009 2 norms, vide order dated 3.8.1986. The Government of Haryana issued letter dated 12.7.1991 (Annexure P-6) stating therein that increments granted as incentive for adopting small family norms, this personal pay is to be counted for pension and other pensionary benefits. The grievance of the petitioner is that while calculating pensionary benefits of the petitioner, he was not granted the benefits of the aforesaid special pay. The petitioner also made a representation (Annexure P-3) followed by another representation (Annexure P-4). The short issue involved in this petition is whether special pay if given to an employee can be added for calculating his retiral benefits. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. It is agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties that the issue involved in this petition is no more res integra, having been settled in the case of Wazir Singh Garg vs. Chief Secretary to Government of Haryana and others, 2003(2) RSJ 699 wherein it has been observed as under:- “10.The counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to a judgment of this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.2239 of 1991, Radhe Krishan Sharma vs. State of Haryana and others, 1993(1) Recent Services Judgments Page 540. In this authority, this Court has held that special pay forms part of pay and that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of special pay towards computation of pension. In this authority, the employee was working on deputation and the Court has held that the special CWP No. 20157 of 2009 3 pay has to be added in the last pay drawn towards calculation of his pensionary benefits. The decision in Radhe Krishan Sharma's case (supra) squarely covers the case in hand.” In view of the above, this petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to re-fix the pension and other retiral benefits of the petitioner by taking into account his personal pay granted for adopting small family norms. Arrears accruing thereof be paid to the petitioner. Let the needful be done within a period of three months from the date certified copy of this order is received by the respondents. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 19.8. 2010 MFK CWP No.10585 of 2010 4