Page No.# 1/9 GAHC010070522026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2055/2026 CHANDRA MUDOI S/O LATE BHOLA MODOI, R/O HOUSE NO. 40, CPR ROAD, PUB-SARANIA, BYE LANE -6, P.O- SILPUKHURI, P.S- CHANDMARI, GUWAHATI, DIST- KAMRUP(M),, ASSAM, PIN- 781003 VERSUS ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 1ST FLOOR, BIJULEE BHAWAN, PALTANBAZAR, GUWAHATI- 781001 2:THE MANAGING DIRECTOR ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTANBAZAR GUWAHATI- 781001 3:THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (HRA) ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTANBAZAR GUWAHATI- 781001 4:THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (F AND A) GAD ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTANBAZAR GUWAHATI- 781001 5:THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (F AND A) PENSION Page No.# 2/9 ASSAM ELECTRICITY GRID CORPORATION LTD. BIJULEE BHAWAN GUWAHATI- 78100 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J PATOWARY, KEYIHEILUNGLE Advocate for the Respondent : SC, APDCL, SC, AEGCL Linked Case : WP(C)/735/2026 SRI PRADIP KUMAR GOSWAMI SON OF LATE B. D. GOSWAMI RESIDENT OF - P.O. AND VILL - KHETRI (OPP. B. ED.COLLEGE) DIST - KAMRUP (M) ASSAM PIN - 782403 VERSUS THE ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 1ST FLOOR BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTANBAZAR GUWAHATI -781001. 2:THE MANAGING DIRECTOR ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTANBAZAR GUWAHATI- 781001 3:THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (HRA) ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTANBAZAR GUWAHATI- 781001 4:THE ASSISTANT GGENERAL MANAGER (F AND A) GAD ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTANBAZAR Page No.# 3/9 GUWAHATI- 781001 5:THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (F AND A) PENSION ASSAM ELECTRICITY GRID CORPORATION LTD. BIJULEE BHAWAN GUWAHATI- 781001 6:THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER NAGAON ELECTRICAL DIVISION-I ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD. (CAR) NAGAON- 782001 ------------ Advocate for : MR. J PATOWARY Advocate for : SC APDCL appearing for THE ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD AND 5 ORS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 06.05. 2026 Heard Mr. J. Patoway, learned counsel for the petitioner; also heard Mr. K. P. Pathak, learned Standing Counsel for the APDCL, Ms. K. Phukan, learned Standing Counsel for the AEGCL. 2. The present writ petitioner in WP(C) No.2055/2026 is former Assistant General Manager of the Assam Power Distribution Company Limited (APDCL), posted at Bijulee Bhawan, Guwahati; and in WP(C) No. 735/2026 is a former Assistant General Manager, posted at APDC, Nagaon Electrical Division. They had superannuated on 31.03.2016. The claims of the writ petitioners are that the benefit of the Revision of Pay Rule, 2017 was not conferred upon them in Page No.# 4/9 respect of the last pay drawn and the pension was calculated on the basis of the pre-revised pay, and as a consequence thereof, it is the claim of the petitioners that their due entitlement has not been received. 3. Similarly situated persons had approached the court by filing WP(C) No. 1607 of 2020, which came to be disposed of on 03.11.2022. The APGCL preferred an appeal being Writ Appeal No. 107 of 2023, and the appeal came to be allowed by judgment and order dated 05.08.2024 interfering with the order passed by the Coordinate Bench. The matter travelled to the Apex Court, and the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 14559 of 2025 by judgment and order dated 04.12.2025 reversed the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court and sustained the order passed by the Coordinate Bench. The Apex Court held that the appellants therein are entitled to pay revision as on 31.03.2016 and their pay for the month of March 2016 shall be determined in the revised scales and such revised pay shall be reckoned for computing the pension payable. The arrears of pay and pension were to be directed to be paid within a period of 6 months, and the revised pension will commence from February 2026. The arrear shall carry interest at the rate of 6% for each year passed, and if the above directions are not complied with and in the event of the interest liability arising for non-payment of arrears within 6 months, as directed, the respondents were to pay the interest and the same would be entitled to be recovered from the erring officers who caused the delay in payment of the arrears. The relevant paragraphs of the judgment of the Apex Court are extracted below: “15. In the present case, on the above principles we looked at the Rules of 2017, which is the subject matter of controversy, which is extracted hereunder: - Application of the Revised Pay (a) All employees who were in services on 31st March 2016 or who Page No.# 5/9 may have been appointed on or after 1st April 2016 shall draw pay in revised pay structure (Pay Band with Grade Pay) applicable to the posts/grades which they have been holding or to which they may have been appointed as the case may be. Fitment benefit/revision of pensioner/family pensioners. (a) The revised basic pension/family pension on 01.04.2016 of the pensioners/ family pensioners who were drawing pension/ family pension on 31.03.2016 shall be fixed by multiplying the existing pension/family pension by a factor of 2.48 and the amount so computed shall be rounded-of to the next multiple of Rs 10/-. The basic pension for all purposes will be w.e.f. 01.04.2016. (b) The revised basic pension in no case shall be lower than 50% of the sum of minimum of the pay in the pay band and the grade pay thereon corresponding to the pre revised pay scale/pay band from which the pensioner had retired. This is applicable to those pensioners who retired on or before 31.03.2016 and after completing 25/33 years of qualifying service as the case may be. 16. Quite distinct from the Central Pay Commission recommendations, referred to in the cited decisions, the Rules of 2017 specifically provided for the benefit of pay revision to all employees who are in service on 31.03.2016 and those who have been appointed on or after 01.04.2016. The appellants byvirtue of the FR 66(a), though attained the age of retirement prior to 31.03.2016, having attained the age only in March 2016 will have their date of superannuation extended to 31.03.2016. The FR does not provide for such extension to be merely for the purpose of pay and allowances nor can there be a deemed legal termination of employer-employee relationship be found on the date of attaining the age of 60 years. The rule of superannuation is clear and unambiguous that any person who attained the age of superannuation in a month will retire only on the last day of that Page No.# 6/9 month. Further by virtue of Rule 5(2) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, on 31.03.2016 the appellants were in service, and they are entitled to the pay revision brought in by the Rules of 2017. Rule 6(2) of the CCS Pension Rules as extracted hereinabove ensures that the last day of retirement, in normal superannuation, as distinguished from a premature or voluntary retirement, is a working day for which the employee is entitled to salary. 17. The contentions based on Rule 32 of the Pay Revision Rules of 2017 is also fallacious. Sub-rule 1 specifically provides that the pension of any pensioner who retired prior to 01.04.2016 shall be revised w.e.f. 01.04.2016. Sub-rule 1(a) provides for computation of pension/family pension as on 31.03.2016 to those persons who were drawing the pension or family pension as on 31.03.2016; which is not applicable to the appellants since they were in service on 31.03.2016 and were not drawing pension or family pension as on that date. Insofar as sub-rule 1(b) is concerned, it only provides for a basic pension not lower than 50% of the sum of minimum of the pay in the pay band and the grade pay, for those pensioners who retired on or before 31.03.2016 and after completing 25/33 years of service. This is only an enabling, provision to ensure a minimum pension to those who are not covered by the revision, which cannot alter the date of effect of the pay revision rules. It cannot be said that the appellants who were in service on 31.03.2016 would not be entitled to the revised pay scales as on 31.03.2016 by virtue of a provision enabling those who are not entitled to the revision to a minimum basic pension. As we noticed the Rules of 2017 are specific and those who are in service on 31.03.2016 are to be granted the revision. 18. We set aside the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court and restore that of the learned Single Judge. The appellants shall be entitled to the pay revision as on 31.03.2016 and their pay Page No.# 7/9 for the month of March 2016 shall be determined in the revised scales and such revised pay shall be reckoned for computing the pension payable. The arrears of pay and pension shall be paid within a period of six months, and the revised pension shall commence from February 2026. The arrears shall carry interest at the rate of 6% for each passed year, if the above directions are not complied with and in the event of interest liability arising for non-payment of arrears within six months, as directed hereinabove, the respondent shall pay the interest and would be entitled to recover the same from the officers who caused the delay in such payment of arrears. 19. The appeals are allowed. 20. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.” 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel to the petitioner that against the order passed by the Apex Court, a review petition was preferred being Review Petition Civil Diary No. 5623 of 2026, which came to be dismissed on 24.03.2026. A copy of the said order is placed before the court by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. It is submitted that the petitioners being similarly situated, the claims made in the writ petition are required to be allowed in terms of the judgment and order passed by the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 14559 of 2025. It is further submitted that along with the revised pay, the direction for payment of interest at the rate of 6% should also be made applicable in the facts of the present case. 6. Mr. K. P. Pathak, learned Standing Counsel, APDCL, however, submits that although there is no dispute that the Apex Court has settled the issue regarding revision of pay, insofar as the writ petitioners are concerned, and that such revised pay is to be reckoned for the purpose of computation of pension Page No.# 8/9 payable. He, however, objects to the claim of the writ petitioner for payment of interest. He submits that the grant of interest to the appellants before the Apex Court was based on the facts and circumstances of that case, and that the appeal before the Apex Court had, in any event, been preferred by the petitioners therein against the present respondent, namely APGCL. He further submits that, since the law has been laid down by the Apex Court with effect from 4th of December, 2025, the Respondent Authorities are now required to carry out the directions relating to revision of pay and reckon the same for computation of pension. 7. Having considered the submissions made and upon perusal of the judgments enclosed to the writ petition, this Court is of the view that since the matter has finally been settled by the Apex Court, there should be no hesitation in allowing the writ petition in terms of the directions contained in the judgment and order dated 04.12.2025, passed in Civil Appeal No. 14559 of 2025. 8. Accordingly, it is held that the petitioners are entitled to pay revision as on 31.03.2016 and their pay for the month of March 2016 shall be determined on the revised pay scales and such revised pay scales shall be reckoned for computing the pension payable. The arrears of pay and pension shall be paid within a period of 6 months and the revised pension will commence from February 2026. 9. Insofar as the direction of interest is concerned and upon perusal of the judgment of the Apex Court, it is seen that the interest will be leviable for each passed year, if the directions as laid down by the Apex Court are not complied with and in the event the directions as contained in the present order are not carried out within a period of 6 months from the date of the receipt of this order, the respondents will be required to pay an interest at the rate of 6% for Page No.# 9/9 each passed year. 10. Accordingly, in terms of the above this writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant