http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

CASE NO.: Review Petition (civil)  648-649 of 2004

PETITIONER: The Government of Tamil Nadu & Ors.              

RESPONDENT: M. Ananchu Asari  & Ors.                                         

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01/02/2005

BENCH: P. VENKATARAMA REDDI & P.P. NAOLEKAR

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T REVIEW PETITION(C)NOS.648-649 OF 2004 IN CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 1444-1445 OF 1999

P. VENKATARAMA REDDI, J.

In order to extend the benefit of pension to the  Government servants absorbed in the State Road Transport  Corporations, the crucial date for granting/calculating  pensionary benefits was specified as 01.05.1975/15.9.1975.  The entitlement to pensionary benefits arises if they had  completed ten years of qualifying government service as on  that day. The validity of fixation of cut-off date as 1.5.1975/  15.9.1975 came up for consideration before the High Court  of Madras. The High Court declared the fixation of the date  aforementioned as illegal and arbitrary and directed the  Government to fix the cut-off date afresh, while indicating  that the date on which the options were finally called for i.e.  20.6.1982 would be an appropriate date for determining the  eligibility for pension. On appeal to this Court, the Judgment  of the High Court was substantially confirmed. This Court  negatived the plea of the appellants that the process of  absorption took place in the year 1975 itself. This Court,  instead of remitting the matter again to the Government for  fixing the appropriate cut-off date and to avoid further  delay, directed that the cut-off date shall be fixed as  1.4.1982 in modification of what was prescribed in G.O.No.  1028 dated 23.9.1985 etc., and G.O.No. 250 dated  18.01.1996. This Court held thus: "Hence, the fixation of cut-off date as 1.4.1982  would, in our view, be appropriate. Taking into  account the aforementioned date for the purpose  of assessing the requisite length of service, we  direct the appellants to take steps to extend the  pensionary benefits to the eligible employees.  Having regard to the conduct of the respondents  in seeking the remedy long after the options were  exercised, we consider it just and proper to direct  that the respondent-employees whoever have  retired should get the arrears of pension only  from 1.1.1988 which date is fixed with reference  to the year of filing the first writ petition namely  W.P.No. 7012 of 1988. The fixation of pension  and payment of arrears should be done  accordingly within a period of four months from  today. The appellants are entitled to adjust the  monetary benefits which the employees would

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

not have received if they were to receive the  pension."

Now the Government of Tamil nadu has filed this  review/clarification petition. The contention in the said  petition is as follows: "It is submitted that the respondent-employees  whoever have retired should get the pension  arrears only from 1.1.1988 by which this Hon’ble  Court has passed an order that the cut-off date is  1.4.1982 and the pensionary benefit from  1.1.1988 for the retired employees. The  petitioner most respectfully accepts the said  judgment, but for the remaining employees  whoever have retired on or after 1.1.1988 should  be eligible for pension on the date of actual  retirement on attaining the age of  superannuation."

Certain contentions are raised on the merits,  especially, in regard to the conclusion of this Court that the  process of absorption did not take place in 1975. We are not  inclined to rehear the arguments on merits. If the  petitioners failed to furnish the necessary material even  during the pendency of appeal in this Court, that is no  ground to review  the judgment. There is also nothing to be  clarified insofar as the operative part of the judgment is  concerned. It is not necessary for us to express any view on  the question whether the Transport Corporation employees  who were erstwhile Government servants retiring after  1.1.1988 would be eligible to get the pension in addition to  the salary drawn by them in the Corporation, as per the  Rules and G.Os. applicable to them. It is the contention of  the learned counsel for the  respondent-employees that the  G.Os. issued by the Government themselves contemplated  such payment and in fact those who were parties to the  earlier writ petitions were given that benefit. This issue  cannot legitimately form the subject matter of either review  or clarification. Hence the Review Petitions are dismissed  with the above observations. Time for implementation of  judgment is extended by four months from today. I.A. Nos. 3 and 4 for impleadment are unnecessary.   The same are dismissed.