Shri CH Mahadevan has succinctly brought some valid points in the faulty calculation of the interim relief which induced me to rummage into my scanty notes to verify the facts as under :-
1.Board resolution is dated 24-11-2001
2.Jaipur HC judgment is dated 12-01-2010
3.CWP 6676/1998 for removal of DR anomaly PRIOR TO 01-08-1997 WAS ALLOWED
4.CWP 654/2007 for UPDATION OF PENSION FOR RETIRED EMPLOYEES ON REVISION OF PAY SCALES WAS ALLOWED ( It is pertinent to mention here that two wage revisions were done on 01-08-1997 and on 01-08-2002 which were in vogue when the Jaipur court judgment was delivered on 12-01-2010 )
The impugned Jaipur HC order dated 12-01-2010. What does it say ( In a nutshell ) as this is the referral point in subsequent court orders :-
“ In the light of the discussion made above both the Writ petitions are allowed. The respondant Corporation is directed to take a decision for IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RESOLUTION D/ 24-11-2001 PASSED BY THE BOARD. THE RESPONDANT CORPORATION CANNOT PROVIDE DIFFERENT CRITERIA FOR GRANT OF DEARNESS ALLOWANCE TO THE EXISTING PENSIONERS i.e. 31-07-1997 (LIC has taken this date as the effective date! ) The benefit arising out of directions above would however be considered by the respondent Corporation so that EVERY RETIRED EMPLOYEE MAY GET THE SAME BENEFIT.
When the court said that they are not concerned about the nitty gritty of the arrears calculation what they had in their mind was that it was not their concern about the arithmetic of the calculation but it does not give the freedom to calculate the arrears in one’s own way flouting the essence of the court order vis-à-vis removal of DR anomaly retrospectively from 01-11-1993 when the pension rules came into force or from the date of retirement whichever is later and to take into account the weightage in pension upgradation .The cutoff date 01-08-1997 taken by the Corporation for the calculation purpose is an infringement on the impugned Jaipur HC order . It is now in the wisdom of the learned counsels to bring these points in their arguments before the SC BENCH.
A learned Judge once said that writing a court order is like undergoing pregnancy pain and we hope that when the final order is passed by the SC it does not suffer from any clarity.