Allowed

Agnelo Gama v. State of Goa Thr Chief Secretary and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC14 Oct 2024WP/213/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought direction for disbursal of pensionary benefits from his retirement date with interest. Court held petitioner entitled to pension as decided by Municipal Council and directed payment of arrears within three months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner declared entitled to pension w.e.f. 31.08.2001; arrears to be paid within 3 months with 6% interest; monthly pension to be paid regularly.

Agnelo Gama Vs State of Goa Thr Chief… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

7-WP-213-2024.DOC

¶2

2024:BHC-GOA:1772-DB

¶3

Maria S.

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.213 OF 2024

¶6

Agnelo Gama, Indian National,
Aged 81 years, residing at West-
Wind Apartments, F-2, First
Floor, Behind Don Bosco
Engineering College, Fatorda,...Petitioner
Margao-Goa.

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. State of Goa, Through Chief
Secretary, Secretariat, Porvorim-
Goa.

¶9

2. Mormugoa Municipal
Council, Through its
Chairperson/Chief Officer,
Vasco Da Gama-Goa, 403802.
3. Directorate of Urban
Development (Municipal
Administration), Through its
Director, 1st Floor, Dempo
Towers, EDC, Patto Plaza,
...Respondents
Panaji, Goa.

¶10

Mr Prabhav Pravin Sirvoicar, Advocate along with Mr S.
Prabhudessai, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr Neehal Vernekar, Additional Government Advocate for
Respondents No.1 and 3.

¶11

Mr Ravi Anand Chandra Chaudhary, Advocate (through VC),
for Respondent No.2.

¶12

CORAM: M. S. KARNIK & VALMIKI MENEZES ,JJ. DATE: 14^th October, 2024

¶13

Page 1 of 5 14^th October 2024

¶14

7-WP-213-2024.DOC

¶15

ORAL JUDGMENT:(Per M. S. Karnik, J)

¶16

Heard Mr Prabhav Sirvoicar,learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr
Neehal Vernekar, learned Additional Government Advocatefor
Respondents No.1 and 3 and Mr Ravi AnandChaudhary, learned Counsel
for Respondent No.2.

¶17

2.The petitioner prays for a direction for disbursal of the pensionary
benefits due to the petitioner with effect from his date of superannuation
from service i.e. 31.10.2001 along with interest @ 12% per annum and a
further direction that the petitioner be paid his monthly pension amount
regularly and without any default.

¶18

3.Learned Counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to the
communication dated 16.06.2006 of the Directorate of Municipal
Administration, Department of Urban Development, Collectorate
Building, Panaji, to the effect informing the Chief Officer of Mormugao
Municipal Council, Vasco-da-Gama that if the contract appointment from
10.06.1997 to 30.08.2000 is regularised by Municipal Council as resolved
in its meeting held on 22.12.1999, the petitioner will get the normal 15
years of service for eligibility of pensionary benefits. It is further
mentioned that as the petitioner is a retired Municipal employee, necessary
action to grant benefits is to be taken by the Council. The communication
further states that the case of Shri Gama be thoroughly examined in terms
of Rule 27 and 28 of CCS (Pension) Rule 1972 and to inform the office
for taking further action in the matter.

¶19

Page 2 of 5 14^th October 2024

¶20

7-WP-213-2024.DOC

¶21

4.The aforesaid communication referred to the extract of Minutes of
Special Council Meeting held on 19.08.2005 at 10:30am. The relevant
portion pertaining to the petitioner as contained in the resolution needs to
be extracted and reads thus:-

¶22

`To discuss and decide the pension matter of Shri Agnelo Gama LDC
ex-employee and to condone the break in service.

¶23

Res. No.115/05

¶24

The above matter along with the file was placed before the Council.
The Chief Officer informed the Council that the DMA has requested
to get the approval of the Council to be condonation of break in
service of Shri. Agnelo Gama, LDC. The Council having discussed
the same approved to condone the break in service of Shr. Agnelo
Gana LDC retired employee of the Mormugao Municipal Council as
below:

¶25

 Y M D

¶26

Break in service -(1) 23rd May 1973 to 2nd January 1978 4 7 9
 (2) 6th April 1982 to 8th June 1996 14 2 2
Contract period (3) 9th June 1996 to 30th August 2000 4 2 21

¶27

Therefore the total break in service – 18 years 9 months and 11 days
and contract period 4 years 2 months and 21 days.

¶28

The Council thereafter recommends to the Government to condone
the break in service to the extent shown as above.'

¶29

5.Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that despite the
resolution of the Mormugao Municipal Councl condoning the break in
service thereby entitling the petitioner the pensionary benefits, the pension
is not actually paid.

¶30

Page 3 of 5 14^th October 2024

¶31

7-WP-213-2024.DOC

¶32

6.Learned Counsel Shri Chaudhary appearing for the Mormugao
Municipal Council submitted that they have received a communication
dated 12.12.2006 from the Director of Municipal Administration that
there is no ground or rule under which the case can be condoned. The
communication is placed on record as Exhibit 'X' for identification.

¶33

7.The petitioner was an employee of the Municipal Council. The
pension is to be paid by the Municipal Council. It is further submitted
that because of the communication from the Directorate of Municipal
Administration, the pension is being withheld.

¶34

8.This stand of the Directorate of Municipal Administration runs
counter to the communication dated 16.06.2006 wherein the Additional
Director of Municipal Administration has clearly stated that as the
petitioner is a retired Municipal employee, necessary action to grant
pension is to be taken by the Council. The Council was thereby asked to
examine the case of the petitioner in terms of Section 27 and 28 of the
CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. From the stand of the Municipal Council it is
seen that as the petitioner's case falls within the scope of Section 27 and 28
of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, the Municipal Council took a decision
entitling the petitioner to normal 15 years of service for eligibility of
pensionary benefits.

¶35

9.Learned Additional Government Advocate, Shri Vernekar when
confronted with this submits that he has instructions to state that the
decision to grant pensionary benefits is purely in the realm of the

¶36

Page 4 of 5

¶37

14^th October 2024

¶38

7-WP-213-2024.DOC

¶39

Municipal Council and the State Government only wanted to be informed
about the decision taken by the Municipal Council. Learned Additional
Government Advocate submitted that if the Municipal Council is willing
to pay the pensionary benefits, the State Government cannot have any
objection to such a course of action. In this view of the matter, considering
the stand of the Municipal Council regularising the contractual
appointment of the petitioner from 10.06.1997 to 30.08.2000, and having
examined the case of the petitioner in terms of Sections 27 and 28 of the
CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 holding that the petitioner is eligible to get
normal 15 years of service for eligibility of pensionary benefits, the petition
needs to be allowed.

¶40

10.The petitioner is held entitled to pension w.e.f. 31.08.2001 as
resolved by the Municipal Council. The arrears to be paid within a period
of 3 months from today with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. The
petitioner be paid monthly pension regularly.

¶41

11.The petition stands disposed of in the above terms. No costs.

¶42

VALMIKI MENEZES, J. M. S. KARNIK, J.

¶43

Signed by: MARIA SUZANA REBELLO Designation: Personal Assistant Date: 16/10/2024 17:59:33

¶44

Page 5 of 5 14^th October 2024

Agnelo Gama v. State of Goa Thr Chief Secretary and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Agnelo Gama v. State of Goa Thr Chief Secretary and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jayashri N. Rajebhosale @ Bimabai R. Sardessai Rep by Attorney Vikramsinh Rajebhonsale Vs Goa Cricket Association Thr. Secretary Chetan Desai and 6 Ors.

Dr. Sujata Dhanajirao Kadam Vs the Principal, Tilak Ayurved Mahavidyalaya and 8 Ors.

Sharlet Fernandes Vs Village Panchayat of Majorda Utorda Calata, Thr. the Secretary and 5 Ors.

Nakul Atma Chodankar Vs Zaidev R. Aldonkar

Federation of Rainbow Warriors, Thr. Its Secretary, David Rodrigues and 3 Ors., Vs the Town and Country Planning Department, Govt. of Goa, Thr. the Chief Town Planner and Anr.

Goenkar, Thr. Its President, Joaquim Santana Leonardo Fernandes Vs State of Goa, Thr. the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Goa and Anr.