Service Law – Naval Service – Service Pension if includes Submarine Pay – Appellants enrolled in the Indian Navy as Sailors and subsequently joined its Submarine Arm – Appellants aggrieved with the refusal of the respondents to take Submarine Pay into account while calculating pension payable to them – Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) held that submarine pay/allowance cannot be counted for the purpose of determining pension – On appeal, held: Concept of Submarine Pay was introduced by Union of India vide Letter dated May 31, 1967 – It was granted to Officers and Sailors who were qualified to serve in submarines, and were deputed to go to sea from time to time – In terms thereof, Submarine Pay was to be treated as “pay for all purposes” which would include computation of Service Pension – Further, case of the appellants was governed by the Navy Instruction dated August 17, 1974, which were in force when appellants retired on January 1, 1983, for computing the pensionary benefits and it did not exclude Submarine Pay from the computation of “pay” for the purpose of calculating Service Pension – It also mentioned Submarine Pay and Submarine Allowance separately – Thus, Submarine Pay and Submarine Allowance are not used interchangeably, as erroneously done in the impugned Order – Submarine Pay was includible in “pay”, for the purposes of computing the Service Pension of the appellants– Order passed by AFT set aside– Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 – Navy(Pension) Regulations,1964 – Regulations 86 and 84.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 Section I of Chapter III of the Navy (Pension) Regulations, 1964 provides the framework for grant of pensionary benefits to Sailors in the Indian Navy. Sailors who have served for a period of fifteen years i.e. the minimum qualifying service for pension, or more, are eligible for grant of Service Pension. Service Pension is fixed on the basis of the rank and group held by a person as per Regulation 84 of the 1964 Regulations. Regulation 86 of the 1964 Regulations provides the rates of Service Pension.[Paras 5-5.2] [286-E-F; 287-A]
1.2 The concept of Submarine Pay was introduced by the Union of India vide Letter dated May 31, 1967. It was granted to Officers and Sailors who were qualified to serve in submarines, and were deputed to go to sea from time to time. Submarine Pay was to be treated as “pay for all purposes”, as per the instructions issued by the Ministry of Defence to the Chief of Naval Staff vide Letter No. dated May 31, 1967. The pay scale and allowances of Officers and Sailors were revised with effect from January 1, 1973 pursuant to the Navy Instruction No.2/S/74 dated August 17, 1974. Navy Instruction dated August 17, 1974 was issued to give effect to the recommendations of the Third Pay Commission, and remained in force till January 1, 1986. [Paras 5.4 and 5.5] [288-A-D]
1.3 Clause 4(a) of Navy Instruction No. 2/S/74 defined the term “basic pay” to denote the pay “actually drawn” in the scale prescribed for the rank and group. Clause 2 provided that the revised rates of pay applicable to Sailors were specified in Appendix A. The heads of Submarine Pay and Submarine Allowance were separately listed in Appendix B at S. Nos. 14 and 15, respectively. The terms Submarine Pay and Submarine Allowance are not used interchangeably, as has been erroneously done in the impugned Order. As per Navy Instruction No. 2/S/74, a Chief Petty Officer was entitled to Submarine Pay at the rate of Rs. 300/- per month, which was distinct from Submarine Allowance. Pursuant to the recommendations of the Fourth Pay Commission the rates of pay and allowances of Officers and Sailors were revised by Special Navy Instruction No.1/S/86 (with effect from January 1, 1986). Further revisions took place pursuant to the recommendations of the Fifth and Sixth Pay Commissions. The definition of “basic pay” was changed to exclude Submarine Pay. The reliance on these instructions by the Respondents is misplaced, as the case of the appellants was governed by the instruction issued pursuant to the Third Pay Commission for computing the pensionary benefits i.e. Navy Instruction No. 2/S/
74 dated August 17, 1974 and Letter No.PA/4102/NHO/504.S/D(PAY/ SERVICES) dated May 31, 1967 as they retired on January 1, 1983. As per Letter No. PA/4102/NHO/504.S/D(PAY/SERVICES) dated May 31, 1967 Submarine Pay was to be treated as “pay for all purposes”, which would include computation of Service Pension. [Paras 5.6-5.8 and 5.11] [289-A-E, G-H]
1.4 The Last Pay Drawn Certificate of the appellants shows that Submarine Pay was actually being drawn as a separate head of “pay”. Navy Instruction No.2/S/74 did not exclude Submarine Pay from the computation of “pay” for the purpose of calculating Service Pension. In contrast, the entries with respect to Aviation Sailors, note (ii) below Appendix B of Navy Instruction No. 2/S/
74 specifically excluded Flying Pay from being treated as “pay” for the computation of pension and gratuity. [Paras 5.9, 5.10] [289-E-G]
1.5 Submarine Pay was includible in “pay”, for the purposes of computing the Service Pension of the appellants. [Para 6] [290-C]
Anuj Kumar Dey v. Union of India (1997) 1 SCC 366 : [1996] 9 Suppl. SCR 269 ; BALCO Captive Power Plant Mazdoor Sangh and Another v. National Thermal Power Corporation and Others (2007) 14 SCC 234 : [2007]
10 SCR 1084 ; Paradeep Phosphates Limited v. State of Orissa & Ors. 2018 (6) SCALE 338 – referred to.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.