In a significant and pragmatic ruling on the issue of redesignation from Deputy Librarian to Librarian and its impact on pay scale and retirement age, the Allahabad High Court has held that recovering salary benefits after 17 years of service is not justified, especially when there is no indication of fraud by the employee. Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery made this observation while disposing of the petition filed by Umesh Kumar. The Court remarked,
“There is no subsequent Government order on the issue, whether the age of retirement would be determined from the change of nomenclature of post, i.e, Deputy Librarian to Librarian.”
In the present case, the petitioner, born on 3 January 1958, was appointed as Deputy Librarian in 1991. The prescribed age of retirement for this post is 60 years; thus, he retired on 30 June 2018 after being granted the benefit for the academic session. The petitioner argued that pursuant to the Government Order dated 26 December 1998, his designation stood changed to Librarian, and therefore, he was entitled to serve up to the age of 62 years.
Rejecting this plea outright the Court clarified that the Government Order merely allowed a change in designation and the grant of the higher UGC pay scale applicable to Librarians, but it did not modify service conditions, especially the retirement age. Since retirement age is governed strictly by service rules and carries financial implications, it cannot be inferred or extended merely on the basis of a change in nomenclature. Consequently, the petitioner’s retirement at the age of 60 was held to be entirely valid.
On the second aspect, the Court noted that the petitioner was granted the Librarian’s pay scale in 2001 even though he was working in the lower pay scale of ₹1400–2300, whereas the 1998 Government Order applied only to those Deputy Librarians who were in the pay scale of ₹2000–3200. The Court held that, strictly interpreted, the petitioner was not eligible for the higher pay scale at all.
However, the Court emphasized that, “petitioner was granted benefit of higher pay scale in the year 2001 and he has worked on same pay scale for 17 years and also granted other benefits on basis of said pay scale. He was also granted UGC pay scale and benefits of revised pay scale also. Therefore, after he crossed the age of 60 years, any order that determination of pay scale made about 17 years ago, was bad in law and consequential order of recovery, would be against the interest of justice.”
Citing the Supreme Court’s principles laid down in State of Punjab vs. Rafiq Masih, the Court reaffirmed that benefits granted long ago cannot be recovered from an employee after retirement, particularly when there is no allegation of fraud.
The Court ultimately granted relief to the petitioner by directing that his pension be calculated on the basis of the last pay drawn and that the department must withdraw its recovery of payment made pursuant to higher pay scale granted to petitioner and also related financial relief.
Case: Umesh Kumar vs State of U.P. and others
