Orissa High Court
Case Details
ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 In the matter of an Application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 *** Paradip Port Trust Officer Pensioners Association Bhubaneswar Represented through its General Secretary Shesadev Sahoo Aged about 78 years Son of Late Udayanath Sahoo At: Mahavinayak Puram, Plot No.BD/24 P.O.: KIIT, Bhubaneswar District: Khordha. ... Petitioner -VERSUS- 1. Union of India Represented through its Secretary Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Water Ways (PHRD) Division New Delhi. 2. Chairman, Paradip Port Trust Paradip, District: Jagatsinghpur 3. Financial Advisor and Chief Accounts Officer Paradip Port Trust, Paradip District: Jagatsinghpur … Opposite parties. W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 1 of 64 Counsel appeared for the parties: For the Petitioner : M/s. Manoja Kumar Khuntia, Gyana Ranjan Sethi and Ms. Babita Kumari Pattanaik, Advocates For the Opposite party No.1 : Mr. Prasanna Kumar Parhi, Deputy Solicitor General of India. For the Opposite party Nos.2 and 3 : M/s. Satya Smruti Mohanty, Swayamjit Rout and Nishit Agarwal, Advocates P R E S E N T: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN Date of Hearing : 21.08.2024 :: Date of Judgment : 18.11.2024 J UDGMENT Assailing the communication dated 12.04.2021 of the Administrative Department of the Paradip Port Trust addressed to the General Secretary of Paradip Port Trust Officer Pensioners Association, Sri Shesadev Sahoo, ex- Welfare Officer, affirming to be the petitioner, has filed the present writ petition with the following prayers: “It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon‟ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the case, call for the records and after hearing both the parties pass the following reliefs: W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 2 of 64 i) ii) To quash Annexure-5. the order dated 12.04.2021 under To direct opposite parties to revise pension accrued under 2nd Method in favour of Class-I and Class-II in Paradip Port Trust retired prior to Officers 01.01.2017 in accordance with Notification dated 05.02.2020; iii) To direct the Opposite Parties to grant all financial benefits consequent upon revision of pension accrued under 2nd method in accordance with notification dated 05.02.2020; And pass such other order/orders as may be deemed fit and proper for the interest of justice. And for this act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.” Facts: 2. The petitioner, styled as “Paradip Port Trust Officer Pensioners Association”, Bhubaneswar has come up before this Court seeking to direct the opposite parties to extend the benefit by calculating consolidated revised pension under the second method in favour of Class-I and Class-II Officers of Major Port and Dock Labour Board, retired prior to 01.01.2017 in terms of Circular dated 05.02.2020 of the Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways (PHRD) Division by quashing communication vide Letter No.907—AD/RR/II/19/2016 (Pt.II), dated W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 3 of 64 12.04.2021 by the Paradip Port Trust, Administrative Department. 2.1. The facts and figures as emanates from the contents of the writ petition have been narrated hereinafter. 2.2. The Government of India set up a Pay Revision Committee vide Office Memorandum No.A29018/2/ 2016-TE-1, dated 28.10.2016 to formulate the pay revision of Class-I and Class-II Officers of Major Port Trust and Dock Labour Boards to be effective from 01.01.2017. Taking into account the recommendation made by the Pay Revision Committee, the competent authority accorded approval for revision of pension and pensionary benefits of the Officers of Major Port Trust and Dock Labour Boards who retired prior to 01.01.2017. Accordingly, the opposite party No.1- Ministry of Shipping (PHRD) issued Instruction Circular bearing No.A-29018/2/2016-PE-I, dated 05.02.2020 (referred to as “Circular, 2020” for convenience) for working out one of the alternative methods for computation of consolidation of pension for pre- 01.01.2017 retirees. 2.3. Said Circular, 2020 provided for calculation of consolidation of pension in the following manner: “2.0 First method for consolidation of pension.— W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 4 of 64 The first method is to grant DA merger and Fitment Benefit as allowed to serving employees. 2.1 The consolidation of pension in respect of pre-01.01- 2012 retirees/Family Pensioners may be done as indicated below: (i) The existing Pension/Family Pension (ii) Dearness Relief as on 01.01.2017 (upto AICPI (2001=100) average index 277) (iii) Fitment Benefit @ 15% of (i) + (ii) The amount (i+ii+iii) so arrived shall be considered as Consolidated Pension/Family Pension w.e.f. 01.01.2017. The fixation of pension will be subject to the provision that the revised pension shall in no case be lower than 50% of minimum of the revised pay scales corresponding with the pre-revised pay scales of the post from which the Pensioner had retired. The revised Family Pension shall in no case be lower than 30% of minimum of the revised pay scales of the post corresponding with the pre-revised pay scales of the post from which the Pensioner had retired. 2.2 The Pension/Family employees retired/died during the period from 01.01.2012 to 31.12.2016 may be consolidated as indicated below: Pension of (i) The Pension/Family Pension“recalculated after excluding the element of Special Pay of 17.5% of mean pay. (ii) Dearness Relief as on 01.01.2017 (upto AICPI (2001=100) average index 277). W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 5 of 64 (iii) Fitment Benefit @ 15% of (i) + (ii). The amount (i+ii+iii) so arrived shall be considered as Consolidated Pension/Family Pension w.e.f. 01.01.2017. 2.3 For this purpose, existing Pension/Family Pension will be the basic Pension/Family Pension only without the element of additional pension available to the old pensioners/family pensioners of the age of 80 years and above. 2.4 The additional pension/family pension payable to the old pensioners/family pensioners will be worked out separately. 2.5 Since the consolidated Pension will be inclusive of if any, the the commuted portion of Pension, commuted portion will be deducted from the said amount while making monthly disbursement. 3.0 Second method for consolidation of pension.— 3.1 In the second formulation, the Pension/Family Pension of employees who retired/died prior to 01.01.2017 may be revised by notionally fixing their pay in the revised scales of pay of the post corresponding to the pay in the pre-revised pay scale of the post at which they retired/died. This will be done by notional pay fixation under each intervening Pay Revisions, based on the formula for revision of pay. While fixing pay on notional basis, the pay fixation formulae as per pay revision orders and other relevant instructions on the subject in force at the relevant time shall be strictly followed. 50% of the notional pay as on 01.01.2017 shall be the W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 6 of 64 revised pension and 30% of this notional pay shall be the revised family pension w.e.f. 01.01.2017 as per this formulation. In the case of family pensioners who were entitled to family pension at enhanced rate, the revised family pension shall be 50% of the notional pay as on 01.01.2017 and shall be payable till the period up to which family pension at enhanced rate is admissible as per Rules. The amount of revised pension/family pension so arrived at shall be rounded off to next higher Rupee.
Legal Reasoning
3.2 The higher of the two formulations i.e. the revised pension/family pension as per first method or the revised pension/family pension as worked out in accordance second method above, shall be granted to pre-2017 pensioners revised pension/family pension w.e.f. as 01.01.2017. 4.0 As the notional fixation of pay in different Pay Revisions will take time, Ports shall pay arrears of revised pension as per First Method and take expeditious action for notional fixation of pay and revision of pension. For calculation of arrears becoming due on the revision of pension/family pension on the basis of Second Method, the arrears of revised pension/family pension already paid on revision of pension/family pension in accordance with First Method shall be adjusted. The interim relief granted vide Ministry letter No. A- 29018/13/2013-PE-I (pt) dated 09.03.2019 shall be adjusted from the arrears. 5.0. While implementing the pay revision order dated 03.08.2010, some Port Trusts had upgraded the pre W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 7 of 64 revised pay scale of Rs.9,100-15,100/- to 10,750- 16,750/- on 31.12.2006 and then revised the pay scales to Rs.20,600-46,500/- on 01.01.2007. This issue was examined by this Ministry in consultation with Department of Expenditure and clarification was issued on 23.11.2016. The clarification issued by this Ministry has, however, been challenged in the Hon‟ble Calcutta High court and Mumbai High Court which is now the subject matter in the pending W.P. No. 1128 of 2016 and pending W.P. No 1703 of 2017 respectively. The pension of the officers affected by the above mentioned litigation may be revised with effect from 01.01.2017 but no arrears shall be paid or recoveries shall be made till the final outcome of the above said Court cases. This fixation is an interim measure. Final settlement of such cases shall be based on the decision of the Hon‟ble Courts in the said cases. 6.0 This Pension Consolidation Order shall be implemented by the Major Port Trusts only after rectifying the anomalies, if any, done by some Ports in respect of officers who retired from 01.01.2007 to 31.12.2016, by upgradation of pay scales, grant of bunching increments and stepping up of pay, as directed by this Ministry‟s letter No. A-29018/4/ 2019-PE-I dated O1st October, 2019. Ports shall submit a confirmation to this effect to the Ministry.” 2.4. As per said Circular, 2020 the petitioner claims to be entitled for revision of pay in accordance with the second method but under misconception the opposite party No.2 has implemented the purport of the revision of W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 8 of 64 pension choosing higher amount arrived at by not computing in its right earnest as envisaged in Circular, 2020. On the other hand, the opposite parties have released the payment by deducting the interim relief granted by the Letter dated 09.03.2019 of the Ministry. To ventilate its grievance, the General Secretary of the Paradip Port Trust Officer Pensioners Association requested for revision of the pension by adopting the second method. 2.5. The Paradip Port Trust in Administrative Department vide Letter No.907-AD/RR/II/19/2016 (Pt.II), dated 12.04.2021 (“communication, 2021”, for brevity) has intimated that the Paradip Port Trust has revised the pension of retired employees in accordance with the Circular, 2020. As per the calculation of the opposite parties, the petitioner is stated to be entitled to Rs.35,540/- as per the first method; whereas, the amount arrived at is Rs.35,540/- by application of the second method. It is alleged that such calculation contradicts methodology envisaged in the Circular, 2020. For appreciating above fact, it is fruitful to quote the contents of said communication, 2021: “Sir, W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 9 of 64 With reference to the representation, vide letter No.PPTOPA/01/21 dated 01.03.2021, on the above subject. 2. Finance & Accounts Department has since issued reply, vide their letter 20.10.2020, mentioned that “as per the order of the Ministry dated 05.02.2020, pension has to be calculated in two methods and the pensioners will get the higher of the two methods” and Paradip Port the retired Trust has revised employees, accordingly. the pension of This is for favour of your information please.” 2.6. Accordingly, the pay of all those employees who retired prior to 01.01.2017 and were in receipt of pension as on 01.01.2017 is required to be fixed on notional basis in the revised scale of pay for the post held by the pensioner at the time of retirement or on the date of death of the employee. 2.7. The Government of India in Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways (PHRD Division) in its First Meeting of Anomaly Committee held on 24.12.2020 vide Minutes F.No.A-29018/2/2016-PE-I, dated 16.03.2021 resolved inter alia following issues relevant for the present purpose: Sl. No. 2. Issue Represen-tationer Comments/ observations In pension revision order pre-01.01.2017 for All India Federation of Dock and Port The existing provision conveys W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 10 of 64 retirees replacing Pensioners‟ Association (18.05.2020) revised “the pension shall in no case be lower than 50% of minimum of the revised pay scales of the post from which the pensioner had retired” with revised pension “the shall in no case be lower than 50% of minimum of the revised pay scales of the post corresponding with the pre-revised pay scales of the post from which the pensioner had retired.” 7. to pay Request reconsider the exclusion of 17.5% for special calculating fitment benefit from 01.01.2017. Petitioners have claimed that not including 17.5% special pay in the pay revision from 01.01.2017 has again resulted in an anomaly between Class-I and Class-II Port Officers and Class-III and Class- IV Port employees Ports Retired Association All India Federation of Dock and Port Pensioners‟ Association (18.05.2020) Major Officers (09.09.2020) MPT Retired Officers‟ Association (18.05.2020) Port Retired Cochin Employees‟ Forum (07.10.2020) Visakhapatnam Port Retired Officers Welfare Association (09.09.2020) Sh. Sureshkumar M. (19.05.2020) Choudhary Venkatagiri (12.07.2020) W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 the same meaning as the words “of the post” have been used once.
Decision
It was decided pay the vide revision order dated 05.02.2020 at para 2.3 that the Special Pay granted vide Ministry‟s order dated 20.07.2017 is to be subsumed in pay the revision, accordingly while working out the benefit, fitment the of element special pay is to be ignored. The order was based on PRC the recommendations. Special pay was granted to officers affected by pay revision of Group D C and only employees Page 11 of 64 to all and not officers. is It granted as an interim measure. For arriving at the scales of pay and fitment benefit of officers of Major Port Trusts, DPE Guidelines are followed. Hence, there is no ground for reconsideration. 2.8. In consonance with the above clarification, the amount of pension as calculated by the petitioner-Shesadev Sahoo (retired prior to 01.01.2017) would stand thus: 01. Existing basic pay on the date of retirement 02. Revised scale of the post corresponding to the post in pre-revised pay scale of the post at which he retired Rs.40,000/- 03. Revised scale of the post 04. Dearness relief to AICPI to 277 point is 119.8% 05. Fitment benefit @ 15% (3+4) Total 28,120/- 40,000/- Rs. Rs. to Rs. 1,40,000/- 40,000/- Rs. 47,920/- Rs. Rs. 13,188/- Rs. 1,01,108/- 2.9. It is the claim of the petitioner that the notional revised scale of pay of the post should have been fixed at Rs.40,000/- and the calculation of revised pension is sought to be made by the petitioner in tune with second method vide Circular, 2020 instead of the modality specified in the impugned communication, 2021 (Annexure-5), which stated that “as per the order of the Ministry dated 05.02.2020, pension had to be calculated in two methods and the pensioners will get the higher of W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 12 of 64 the two methods”. The calculation sheet in respect of Sri Shesadev Sahoo, ex-Welfare Officer, as placed on record at Annexure-6— “Methodology Revision of Pension with effect from 01.01.2017 as per MoS No.A-29018/2/2016- PE-I” signed by the Deputy Chief Accounts Officer, Paradip Port Trust vide Annexure-6 depicts the following facts and figures: Consolidation of pension of employees retired / died pre-01.01.2017 Method-I 01. Name and Designation of Method-II retiree/died Shesadev Sahoo, ex-Welfare Officer 2293 28.02.2010 02. PPO No. 03. Date of retirement/death 04. Scale of pay at of (pre- time the retirement revised) 05. Revised Rs. 16,400/- - Rs. 40,500/- Rs. 40,000/- - Rs. 1,40,000/- corresponding Scale of Pay as on 01.01.2017 06. Existing pension/ pension basic family 07. Dearness relief up to AICPI 277 point is 119.8% Total 08. Fitment @ 15% of (6+7) 09. Total of (6+7+8) (Amount rounded to next higher rupee) Rs. 14,060/- 10. Existing Rs. 16,844/- 11. Dearness basic pay as on date of retirement/death relief up to AICPI 277 point is 119.8% Rs. 28,120/- Rs. 33,688/- Rs. 30,904/- Rs. 4,636/- 12. Fitment @ 15% of Rs. 61,808/- Rs. 9,271/- (10+11) Rs. 35,540/- 13. Total of (10+11+12) Rs. 71,079/- 14. Amount rounded to next higher rupees 15. Revised/family pension, i.e., Rs. 71,080/- Rs. 35,540/- W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 13 of 64 of 50%/30% notional basic pay arrived at (serial No.14) 16. Revised pension/ family pension as on 01.01.2017 will be Rs. 35,540/- higher in between 9 and 15 17. Basic pension/family pension as on 01.01.2017 a. b. c. d. e. Original pension Less: commutated pension Residuary pension Enhanced pension Normal pension Rs. 35,540/- Rs. 3,555/- Rs. 31,985/- Rs. 35,540/- Rs. 21,324/- 2.10. The petitioner asserts that if calculation is made according to the first method, then the consolidated revised pension would be around Rs.35,540/-, nonetheless, on calculation as specified in the second method, the consolidated revised pension would stand at around Rs.50,560/-. 2.11. Therefore, the petitioner craving to quash the communication, 2021, has alleged that, “as wrong calculation has been done by the authorities the members of the petitioner‟s Association have been deprived of their pension with effect from 01.01.2017 in an erroneous manner”. Counter affidavit of the opposite parties: 3. By way of filing Memorandum of Appearance dated 25.06.2021 on 28.06.2021, Assistant Solicitor General of India, Government of India for High Court of Orissa entered appearance and, accordingly, while issuing notice in the instant writ petition on 05.07.2021, this W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 14 of 64 Court directed copies of the writ petition to be served on learned Assistant (redesignated as “Deputy”) Solicitor General of India representing the opposite party No.1- Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways. Despite compliance, the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India chose not to file response to the writ petition though the matter was listed on 16.01.2023 and 29.08.2023. Neither any counter affidavit is forthcoming nor did he moved any petition seeking to extend the time to file the response. 4. Sri Satya Smruti Mohanty, learned Advocate represented the opposite party Nos.2 and 3, and on 01.11.2021 filed counter affidavit being sworn to by Shri Dharmendra Nath Sondhi, Financial Advisor and Chief Accounts Officer, Paradip Port Trust, Paradip Port in the district of Jagatsinghpur (opposite party No.3) on 25.10.2021, who also affirms to have been authorised to file the counter affidavit on behalf of the opposite party No.2. 4.1. In the counter affidavit it has been asserted that as per the Clause 3.2 of the Circular, 2020 (Annexure-1 of the writ petition), the revised pension/family pension whichever is higher or beneficial between the resultant of calculations made as specified in Method-I and Method- II is extended to the pensioners of pre-01.01.2017 retirees. Accordingly, the opposite parties have released W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 15 of 64 the pensions in favour of each of the pensioners as per the above methodology. 4.2. As an interim measure, payment was released in favour of all Port Pensioners viz. Class-I and Class-II officers with effect from March, 2019 vide Office Order dated 10.04.2019 and the same has been done in accordance to the Circular dated 09.03.2019 issued by the opposite party No.1. However, in the above-mentioned Circular dated 05.02.2020 at Clause 4 it has been clarified that the interim „payment granted vide Circular dated 09.03.2019 would be adjusted from the arrears. The Office Memorandum No.1241— AD/RR/II/06/2015 (Pt.), dated 10.04.2019 made it clear that “The interim amount paid would be adjustable against the pension revision arrears, if any, payable from 01.01.2017 or 01.01.2012 as the case may be, subject to the outcome of the pending writ appeal No.1642 of 20171”. Therefore, 1 Appears to have referred to, Union of India and others Vrs. Chennai Port & Dock Officers‟ Association, W.A. No.1642 of 2017, disposed of on 08.04.2024, by a Division Bench of the Madras High Court with the following observation: “2.1. *** The major trade unions used to place charter of demands once in five years and arriving at a negotiated wage settlement with the Management of second respondent Port Trust. 2.2. The last of such wage settlement in respect of unionised category expired on 31.12.2011 and a new wage settlement was arrived at giving effect to the revision of salary with effect from 01.01.2012. It is also in practice that as soon as wage settlement in respect of unionised category is finalized, the management of the second respondent Port Trust used to arrive at an agreement for revision of salary in respect of Class I and II officers. However though wage settlement in respect of Class III and IV employees were finalised and given effect from 01.01.2012, no such W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 16 of 64 2.3. 2.4. salary revision for Class-I and Class-II Officers was undertaken by the Management of the second respondent Port Trust. *** The demand of Class I and II officers were referred to the third appellant/Ministry of Shipping and the third appellant in turn referred it to the third respondent/Indian Port Association and also constituted a sub- committee under the chairmanship of Shri. P.C. Parida, Deputy Chairman, Chennai Port Trust for finding out viable solution. The said sub-committee consisted of four other officials. The said sub-committee after thorough analysis rendered a report dated 03.06.2014. The above report was forwarded to the third appellant/Ministry of Shipping. However, the report was not accepted by the third appellant/Ministry of Shipping and it was kept under consideration. In the meanwhile, the due wage revision extended to Class III and IV employees, their pay was substantially increased and most of the Class II officers stated getting lesser salary than that of Class III employees. *** The Writ Court, by order dated 04.04.2017[W.P. No. 41669 of 2016 (Chennai Port & Dock Officers‟ Association Vrs. Union of India) disposed of on 04.04.2017 (2017 SCC OnLine Mad 18757)], allowed the writ petition with the following observations: “A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents 1 to 3 opposing the above prayer. A perusal of the counter affidavit shows that when a Committee has been constituted to formulate the proposals for pay revision of Class I & II officers to be effective from 01.01.2017, this Court could see that the pay revision has been ordered for Class III & IV employees to be made effective from 01.01.2012. While that being the case, the pay revision of Class I and II officers also should be from 01.01.2012, failing which the same would amount to clear discrimination. Therefore, the decision taken by the third respondent to formulate the proposal for pay revision of Class I & Class-II officers from 01.01.2017, leaving the period from 01.01.2012 to 01.01.2017, is without any justification, for the reason that when the Class III & IV employees of Major Port Trusts have been given the benefit from 1.1.2012, the members of the petitioner Association are also justified in approaching this Court for a direction to the Committee constituted under the impugned office memorandum to formulate the proposals of pay revision of Class I & Class-II officers from 01.01.2012. Therefore, while accepting the impugned office memorandum to constitute a Committee consisting of the Chairman and Members to formulate proposals for the pay revision of Class I & II officers of Major Port Trusts and Dock Labour Board, the said committee shall examine and formulate the proposal of pay revision for Class I & II officers from proposal of pay revision for Class I & II officers from 1.1.2012, after inviting the views of the members of the petitioner Association. The writ petition stands allowed.” 2.5. Challenging the said order, the petitioner Department has filed the present intra court appeal. W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 17 of 64 *** 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. In this context, the learned counsel appearing for the Chennai Port Trust seeks two weeks time to get written instructions on this aspect as to whether the Special Pay has been paid to all the employees who are entitled to and pursuant to which, whether the Port has implemented the recommendation of the Committee for pay revision for the period from 01.01.2017 onwards as directed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 31.10.2019. He further submits that pursuant to the aforesaid interim directions issued by this court, the second respondent Port Trust has filed a status report of the Ministry of Shipping dated 20.07.2017 with respect to payment of 17.5% special pay to the Officers along with supporting documents. The order of the Ministry of Shipping reads as follows: „The Class I and II officers of Major Port Trusts/DLBs may be granted special pay of 17.5% of the mean of pay grades, to be treated as basic pay for all purposes, with effect from 01.01.2012 subject to the condition that as on 01.01.2012, the overall increase in Pay+DA should not be more than Rs.6890/- (maximum increase in pay of Group C &D employees). Further provided that the grant of above special pay will be admissible to the affected officers only. The additional cost would be met by Ports from their internal resources alone and no financial support/assistance will be provided by the Government of India.‟ For the said status report filed by the second respondent Port Trust, the first respondent Association herein has filed its objection before this Court. Learned Additional Solicitor General of India has stated before this Court that the directions issued by the writ court was to consider respondent Association herein/petitioner on par with Group C and D employees. Now that the said claim of the first respondent Association herein has been duly considered by the committee constituted by the Ministry of Shipping and a status report has been filed before this Court, the objection made by the first respondent herein could not be decided in this writ appeal. Pursuant to the said status report, the Ministry of Shipping has to pass a memorandum. It is further submitted that the recommendations made by the Committee for pay revision are well reasoned are within the legal limits and therefore, the status report filed by the second Port Trust cannot be challenged by the first respondent herein in the present writ appeal. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the first respondent Association submitted that though as per the order dated 20.07.2017 of the third appellant/Ministry of Shipping, the special pay of 17.5% to be treated as basic pay for all purposes, a ceiling has been prescribed to the effect that the amount paid should not be more that of Rs.6890/-, which is totally untenable and therefore, on the aforesaid ground, he states that the status report is not sustainable. the claim of first the W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 18 of 64 after finalization of the consolidated pension/family pension as per the Circular dated 05.02.2020, the same has been released after adjusting the above interim payment. 4.3. Clarifying the position with respect to Sri Shesadev Sahoo-petitioner, retired on 28.02.2010, it has been stated that his basic pay was fixed at Rs.28,120/- in the pre-revised scale of pay of Rs.16,400/- — Rs.40,500/-. After Circular dated 05.02.2020, being issued, the pay scale was revised to Rs.40,000/- — Rs. 1,40,000/- and, accordingly his basic pay at the time of retirement has been worked out notionally by taking the dearness relief and 15% fitment. 8. 9. In view of the elaborate submissions made by the parties, it is apparent that in the present appeal, the aforesaid disputed facts, cannot be gone into and further only after due proceedings has been issued by the Ministry of Shipping/third appellant, the first respondent Association herein will have the right to challenge the said proceedings in a manner known to law. Therefore, in the light of the above, this Court is inclined to direct the third appellant, to issue necessary proceedings by complying the directions given by the Co-ordinate Bench by interim order dated 31.10.2019 to implement the recommendations of the committee for Pay Revision, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and we make it clear that if the first respondent Association/writ petitioner is aggrieved by such proceedings, it is open to them to challenge the same before the appropriate forum. the above directions the writ appeal stands disposed of. Consequently, CMP Nos.21448 of 2017, 17758 and 19645 of 2018 and 10043 and 10865 of 2019, are closed.” 10. With W.P.(C) No.16377 of 2021 Page 19 of 64 4.4. It has been expanded by clarifying the position in paragraphs 12 and 13 of the counter affidavit in the following manner: “12. That, in case of General Secretary of the petitioner- Association, the pension calculation (as detailed in Annexure-6 of the writ petition) in both the methods comes to Rs.35,540/- and, hence, the said amount was fixed as his revised pension/family pension. The contention of the petitioner that his basic pay of Rs.28,120/- should fixed directly to Rs.40,000/- has no basis as the basic pay of the retiree shall always be taken from the amount he/she last drawn at the time of retirement2. 13. That, for better appreciation of facts, another calculation of a pensioner Sri Rahas Bihari Muduli, (Asst. Engineer (Civil) (Class-II) is attached herewith where the revised pension/family pension comes to Rs.31,775/- as per Method-II and Rs.31,292/- as per Method-I respectively. Hence, the higher amount/beneficial amount of revised pension i.e. Rs.31,775/- as per Method-II has been fixed in favour of Sri Muduli. A copy of the calculation sheet of Sri Muduli is enclosed as Annexed as Annexure-C.” 4.5. Calculation sheet at Annexure-C enclosed to counter affidavit depicts facts and figures as follows: 2