' The petitioner challenges the refusal on the part of the respondents to fix his pension in accordance with the letter dated 15th July, 1980 issued by the Government of Punjab (Finance Department) to all Administrative Secretaries and others.
2. The petitioner retired from the post of Deputy Secretary, Government of the Punjab on 1st of April, 1980. He was allowed a monthly pension of Rs, 1,348 but he claimed instead a sum of Rs, 1,697 on the basis of the letter dated 17th January, 1977, as amended by the letter referred to above. The respondent refused to accept this contention and referred the case back to the Finance Department, Government of the Punjab, who clarified it vide its letter dated 2nd September, 1980.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel that as the letter dated 15th July, 1980 amended the previous letter and as it provided benefits to the existing pensioners the respondent had no authority in law to refuse to allow the said benefits to him. The relevant portion of the letter dated 15th July, 1980 reads as under :- "I am directed to state that further liberalization of existing pensionary benefits has been under the consideration of Government for some time past. It has now been decided that with effect from 1st July, 1980, the amount of pension in excess of Rs, 2,000 (instead of Rs, 1,000) shall be reduced by 50%. Therefore, the figure of Rs, 1,000 shall be substituted by the figure of Rs, 2,000 referred to in para. 2 (a) of the FD's Circular Letter No, FD-SR-III-4-1/77, dated 17th January, 1977, and in the Note below the Revised Pension Table at Annexure-I thereto."
4. According to the letter dated 17th January, 1977, the Governor of Punjab had decided that pension and retirement benefits to civil servants who retired or expired on or after 1st March, 1972 should be determined on the following basis :- "Pension shall be calculated at the rate of 70 per cent. Of the average emoluments on completion of 30 years qualifying service. Where qualifying service is less than 30 years, but not less than 10 years, proportionate reduction in percentage shall be made. Any amount of pension in excess of Rs, 1,000 shall be reduced by 50 per cent. A revised Pension Table regulating all the for pensions, namely, Compensation Pension, Superannuation Pension, Invalid Pension and Retiring Pension is enclosed in Annexure I."
' Paras. 2 to 12 are explanatory.
5. The paragraphs 8 and 10 of the abovesaid letter may also be reproduced with advantage :- "8. Lithe demise of an existing pensioner occurs, or occurred, on or after 1st March, 1972,s within ten years of his retirement, family pension will be admissible for the unexpired portion of ten years."
11 Ir "M. The provisions of this circular letter will take effect from the 1st March, 1972, but the financial benefits shall be paid with effect from the 1st February, 1977."
6. The position taken on behalf of the respondents is based on the letter dated 16th September, 1980 issued by the Government of Pakistan (Finance Department) to the Government of the Punjab (Finance Department). It states that the two orders issued by the Finance Division. Government of Pakistan dated 28th of June, are independent, one related to further liberalization of the liberalized pension rules and was applicable to those retiring on 1st of July, 1980 while the other related to the special ad hoc increase sanctioned in those cases retiring prior to 1st July, 1980. This letter particularly refers to the case of the petitioner to state that his claim is not tenable.
7. The Government of Punjab also issued a clarification dated 2nd September, 1980. It stated that the instructions issued regarding special ad hoc increase admissible to civil pensioners existing on or before 30th June, 1980 have created certain anomalies vis-a-vis pension accruing after 30th June, 1980. In order, therefore, to remove the anomalies, the Governor was pleased to decide that if employees of Grades II to 16 and 17 to 18 got an increase of less than Rs, 70 per month or Rs, 100 per month respectively by the enhancement of cut off point to Rs, 2,000, the increase shall be so determined that a minimum benefit of Rs, 70 or Rs, 100 p.m. As the case may be, is ensured. It was further stated that if the increase allowed under that Department Circular letter dated 15th July, 1980 on the above subject read with the present circular letter resulted in an increase of less than the special ad hoc increase in pension that the special increase as mentioned in various categories accruing on or after 1st July, 1980, they shall be so determined that a minimum benefit equal to the special ad hoc increase mentioned above is ensured.
8. The learned counsel appearing for the two respondents conceded that the petitioner was entitled to an ad hoc increase of Rs, 100 only on the basis of the letter dated 2nd September, 1980, of the Provincial Government. This letter seems to have been issued to take care of the anomalies arising out of the instructions issued regarding special ad hoc increase admissible to civil pensioners existing on or before 30th June, 1980. It, however, referred to letter dated 15th July, 1980.
None of the parties have produced the above instructions. It is, however, quite clear from the letter dated 2nd September, that the enhancement of cut off point from Rs, 1,000 to Rs, 2,000 applied even to the civil pensioners existing on or before 30th June, 1980. Secondly, it provided only a minimum increase when the one admissible was less than that. The maximum was thus left to be determined on the basis of the formula provided.
9. The respondent does not deny that the enhancement of the cut-off point from Rs, 1,000 to Rs, 2,000 as provided in the letter dated 15th July, 1980, applies to the petitioner also. In that view of the matter the letter dated 15th July, 1980, will amend retrospectively the letter dated 17th January. 1977, and benefit all the existing pensioners with only one difference that the benefit will be payable only from 1st July, 1980. This can be the only interpretation to reconcile the three letters referred to above. Again, if the letter dated 2nd September 1980, laid down the minimum ad hoc increase, there could be a higher amount also. The contention of the respondent that the petitioner could get only the minimum permissible is not supported by any letter. Consequently, he can validly claim what may be found due under the letter dated 17th January, 1977, as amended by the letter dated 15th July, 1980. It may further be said that the letter dated 16th September, 1980, of the Central Government is advisory in nature as the Governor is the only competent authority in this matter. Further, that letter has not correctly interpreted the situation as it will not even be reasonable to suggest that the Government would act discriminately to allow pension benefits only to some and not to others.
10. In view of the above, the petitioner is entitled to get his pension revised in accordance with the letter dated 17th January, 1977, as amended by the circular letter dated 15th July, 1980. Further, the benefits so calculated shall be payable only from 1st July, 1980.
' The result is that the refusal on the part of the respondent to act as said above, is without lawful authority. The respondent is, therefore, directed to act accordingly. The parties shall bear their own costs.