This High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the rejection of a petitioner's claim for additional qualifying service to receive a full pension. The Court held Rule 27 conditions were not met as the post was generalist.
Writ petition dismissed; no additional service added; no costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.No.17415 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.01.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH
W.P.No.17415 of 2016
K. Sukumar ... Petitioner
Vs.
Life Insurance Corporation of India,
Mumbai – 400 021.
3.Zonal Training Centre, Jeevan Vidya, Prithvipakkam, Ambattur,
Chennai – 600 053. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the second respondent dated 15.05.2014 vide Ref: Per/ERA/1415/L021 and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent
W.P.No.17415 of 2016
to pay a FULL pension to the petitioner after including the qualifying service of the petitioner from the date of his retirement by invoking Rule 27 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Employees) Rules 1995.
For Petitioner : Mr.Krishna Kumar for M/s.Sarvabhauman Associates
For Respondents : Mr.C.K. Chandrasekkar for LIC [R1 & R2] No appearance [R3]
ORDER
The petitioner herein had joined the services of the Life Insurance Corporation of India ('LIC') on 16.11.1974, as an Assistant. Thereafter, he had resigned on 08.12.1982 after about 8 years of service. In the year 1986, LIC had called for applications for recruitment to the post of Assistant Administrative Officers by way of special recruitment. The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Administrative Officer on 14.03.1987 when his age was 32 years. Thereafter, he had retired on 31.05.2014. His pension was calculated @ 81.8%. By quoting Rule 27 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Employees) Pension Rules 1995, he sought for inclusion of 4 years and 10 months of additional service for
2/6
W.P.No.17415 of 2016
the purpose of claiming full pension. His request came to be rejected through the impugned order dated 15.05.2014, stating that as per Rule 27, his request was not feasible for consideration. Such order is put under challenge in the present Writ Petition.
2. Rule 27 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Employees) Pension Rules 1995 reads as follows:-
“27. Addition to qualifying service in special
circumstances -An employee shall be eligible to add to his service qualifying for superannuation pension (but not for any other class of pension) the actual period not exceeding one-fourth of the length of his service or the actual period by which his age at the time of recruitment exceeded twentyeight years, or a period of five years, whichever is less, if the service or post to which the employee is appointed is one
(a) for which post-graduate research, or specialist qualification or experience in scientific, technological or professional fields is essential;
and
(b) to which candidates of more than twenty-eight years of age are normally recruited; and
(c) for which the candidate was given age relaxation
3/6
W.P.No.17415 of 2016
over and above the maximum age limit fixed by the Corporation on account of his possessing higher qualifications or experience:
Provided that this concession shall not be admissible to an employee unless his actual qualifying service at the time he quits the service in the Corporation is not less than ten years: Provided further that this concession shall be admissible only if the recruitment rules in respect of the said service or post contain a specific provision that the service or post is one which carries the benefit of this rule. ”
3. As per the aforesaid Rule, the benefit of the Rule can be allowed
only if all the three conditions provided under 27(a) to 27(c) are simultaneously satisfied. In the instant case, the post of an Assistant Administrative Officer is a generalist post which does not require an essential qualification of post-graduate research or specialist qualification or experience in scientific technological or professional fields. As a matter of fact, the person who holds a Graduate Degree with 50% marks and 7 years of experience were also eligible for applying to the post of Assistant Administrative Officer.
4/6
W.P.No.17415 of 2016
4. When one of the essential qualifications for claiming addition of
the qualifying service as a special circumstance, has not been complied with by the petitioner herein, he may not be entitled for the benefit under Rule 27 and therefore, his claim for inclusion for the period of four years, cannot be sustained. As such, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order dated 15.05.2014 passed by the third respondent.
5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.
23.01.2023
Speaking/Non-speaking Order Neutral Citation: Yes/No Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Sni
W.P.No.17415 of 2016
M.S.RAMESH,J.
Sni
To
W.P.No.17415 of 2016
23.01.2023
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to additional qualifying service for full pension under Rule 27 of the LIC Employees Pension Rules, 1995.
Whether the post of Assistant Administrative Officer satisfies the conditions in Rule 27(a) requiring post-graduate research, specialist qualification, or professional experience.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
K. Sukumar
The Executive Director (Personnel) Life Insurance Corporation of India
The Chairman, Life Insurance Corporation of India
Zonal Training Centre, Jeevan Vidya
M.S. Ramesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
