Summary
Goa Government employees who were retired at 58 obtained a declaration from the High Court of Bombay at Goa that their retirement age was 60 and that superannuating them earlier was illegal, but because they approached the Court belatedly the High Court denied salary for the two extra years, denied arrears of pension and made pension at the revised rates payable only from 01.01.2020. One petitioner appealed against the denial of arrears. The Supreme Court partly allowed the appeal: delay could justify refusing back wages, but pension is a continuous cause of action and there was no justification for denying arrears of pension computed as if the appellant had retired at 60 or for postponing the revised pension to 2020.
Issues
- Whether, where the High Court holds that an employee was illegally retired at 58 instead of 60 but denies relief for delay in approaching the Court, arrears of pension can also be denied and pension at the revised rates postponed to a future date.
Held
- The High Court may be justified, on the ground of delay, in denying salary for the two extra years the petitioners would have served; but pension is a continuous cause of action, and once the retirement at 58 is held illegal and void there is no justification for denying arrears of pension as if the employee had superannuated at 60, or for making pension at the revised rates payable only from 01.01.2020. (¶ 3)
- The appellant is entitled to pension at the revised rates from the date he attained the age of 60 years, with arrears to be paid within four weeks. (¶ 4)
Result
Appeal partly allowed; the High Court of Bombay at Goa's judgment of 11.02.2020 in Writ Petition No. 961 of 2015 set aside to the extent it denied arrears of pension and made revised pension payable only from 01.01.2020; the appellant held entitled to pension at the revised rates from the date he attained 60 years, arrears payable within four weeks. No order as to costs.