Two friends Mr. Ravi and Mr. Kumar joined AG’s Office as Junior Accountants in Oct 1972. Both of them while working as senior accountants, in 1984, applied for the post of Section Officers advertised by an autonomous body under Ministry of Agriculture; got selected and appointed as SOs in Sep 1984. They were permitted to retain lien for 2 years in AG’s office. On completion of two years both of them opted to be absorbed in AB. At the time of absorption Ravi opted to avail the benefit of 100% commutation of pension due on account of service rendered by him in AG’s office from oct 1972 to date of absorption and drew lump sum payment for the same. Kumar opted to count the entire service rendered by him in AG’s office towards pensionary benefits in AB. In 2001, 1/3 of commuted value of pension was restored to Ravi along with Dearness Relief on the entire pension sanctioned to him for the service rendered by him in AG’s office. Now both Ravi and Kumar are holding the post of Sr. Deputy Secretary in PB-4. Ravi is due to retire on superannuation on 31 May 2010 and Kumar on 31 Aug 2010. On their retirement both will get the same amount of pension from the autonomous body since with the implemention of 6th CPC recommendations,a government official is entitled to full pension on completion of 20 years of service. Ravi has 23 years and 8 months and Kumar has 37 years and 11 months of service in AB. The interesting point to note is that Ravi will get 50% Last pay drawn plus applicable DR along with 1/3 restored value of commuted pension plus DR on the full pension sanctioned by AG’s office in addition to lump sum payment drawn by him at the time of absorption and Kumar will have to be content with 50% LPD plus DR only. Can anyone now imagine the loss that Kumar would suffer due to his option to count the past service for the purpose of pension and the undue benefit that Ravi would enjoy!!!!
The anomaly is glaring but how will Government of India will resolve it?