WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 1 of 18

Non-reportable

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR

AT IMPHAL

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021

Mangsatabam Nilabita Devi, aged about 64 years, W/o. Y.

Bhogendra Singh, a resident of Kontha Khabam Mamang Leikai,

P.O. Mantripukhri, P.S. Heingang, Imphal East District, Manipur

– 795002.

…Petitioner

- Versus -

1. The State of Manipur, represented by Principal Secretary/

Commissioner, Education (S), Government of Manipur, New

Secretariat Building, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, Imphal West,

Manipur-795001.

2. The Principal Secretary/Commissioner (Finance),

Government of Manipur, New Secretariat Building, P.O. &

P.S. Imphal, Imphal West, Manipur-795001.

3. The Director of Education (S), Government of Manipur,

Lamphelpat, Imphal West-795001.

4. Principal Accountant General (A&E), Office of the Accountant

General, Imphal West, Manipur-795001.

…Respondents

B E F O R E

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA

For the petitioner : Mr. L. Raju, Adv.

For the respondents : Mrs. Ch. Sundari, GA;

Mr. S Suresh, Adv.

Date of hearing : 27.05.2025

Date of judgment & order : 19.12.2025

J U D G M E N T A N D O R D E R

[1] Heard Mr. L. Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mrs. Ch.

Sundari, learned Government Advocate for the State respondents; and Mr.

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 2 of 18

S. Suresh, learned counsel for the Principal Accountant General, Manipur.

[2] The petitioner was initially appointed as substitute teacher in the

pay scale of Rs. 240-390/- plus other allowances as admissible under rules

vide order No. 2/30/70-ED(R)(1)(a) dated 30-11-1977 and posted at

Tendongyan U.J.B. School, vice Y. Lukhoi Singh for Sr. Basic Training. Her

service was regularized w.e.f. the date of joining duty vide order No. 2/5/77–

ED(P)(x) dated 08-11-1978 issued by the Director of Education (S),

Government of Manipur.

[3] In pursuance of Government approval to the promotion/

upgradation of undergraduate teachers in government Schools issued under

their letter No. 4/2/87–SE(S) dated 09-01-1990, and after rendering 8 years

of regular service as Assistant Undergraduate Teacher, her post was

upgraded to Graduate Teacher vide order No. 46/2/87–ED(Jr) dated 27-03-

1992 in the pay scale of Rs. 1400–2300/- p.m. with D.A. and other

allowances as admissible under rules with retrospective effect from 31-12-

1987 and abolish her corresponding undergraduate teacher post in the

school.

[4] On the recommendation of the Zonal Education Officer, I.D. Zone-

I’s Screening Committee in its meeting held on 20-12-1999, and as

admissible vide Government’s Notification No. 2/6/5/91-SE(S) dated 09-08-

1991 and 29-08-1994, the petitioner was placed in Senior Scale of Graduate

Teacher in the pay scale of Rs. 5500–9000/- w.e.f. 03-12-1999 vide order

No. 2/4-1/97–ED(ZEO/Z-I)(IV) dated 31-12-1999.

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 3 of 18

[5] After commencement of Manipur Services (Revised Pay) Rules

2010, Government of Manipur issued order dated 03-06-2011, published in

Gazette Notification No. 23 dated 14-09-2011 under Article 309 of the

Constitution of India, revising the pay scales of various categories of regular

teachers under the School Education Department. As per the said

Notification, the pay scale of Graduate Teachers (Untrained) in the Senior

Scale was fixed at Rs. 9300-34800/- + AGP Rs. 4100/-. Accordingly, the

petitioner was allowed to enjoy the said Senior Scale till her retirement on

superannuation.

[6] The petitioner retired from service as Science Graduate Teacher

on attaining the age of superannuation w.e.f. 31-12-2016 vide order dated

24-07-2017. The petitioner was drawing pay in the scale of Rs. 9300–

34800/- + AGP Rs. 4100/- (revised), notionally w.e.f. 01-01-2006 with cash

benefit from 01-07-2011 till her retirement on 31-12-2016. However, instead

of calculating the pension and other retiral benefits of the petitioner in the

scale of Rs. 9300-34800 + AGP Rs. 4100 and total emolument received by

the petitioner, the office of the Accountant General wrongly calculated all the

pensionary benefits and other retiral benefits of the petitioner base on the

lower pay scale of Rs. 5200-20200 + GP 2800 without any reason. The

miscalculation had caused huge serious reduction in the monthly pension

and other retiral benefits of the petitioner which is highly irregular and

discouraging for retired employee in their heydays whose service was

already utilized by the Government.

[7] Similarly situated Graduate Teachers had filed WP(C) No. 780 of

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 4 of 18

2017 and WP(C) No. 410 of 2018 before the Hon’ble High Court and during

pendency of the said petitions, the State Government issued office

memorandum dated 23-03-2019 clarifying that those teachers who had

accepted/opted the modified ROP dated 03-06-2011 and retired from

service, the applicable amount of pension may be calculated as 50% of

average age emolument or last pay drawn i.e. 50% of pay in pay band plus

AGP. The petitioner had accepted/opted the modified ROP dated 03-06-

2011 and she enjoyed the benefit of the office memorandum till her

retirement from service. The Hon’ble High Court disposed of those writ

petitions on 08-08-2019 in terms of the said office memorandum which are

as follows:—

“13. In the result,

(a) the writ petition is allowed.

(b) the respondents are directed to pay pension to the petitioners at

the rate of 50% of average emolument or last emolument i.e.

50% of pay band plus AGP.

(c) The respondents are also directed to calculate and pay the

petitioners 50% of the pension amount as per Gazette

notification dated 03.06.2011 in Serial No. 2 and 3 applicable to

the petitioners.

(d) the said exercise shall be done within a period of two months

from the date of receipt of this copy.”

[8] However, the present petitioner, who is not party in the above

referred writ petitions has been left out.

[9] The submissions of respondent No. 2 are that —

(i) The petitioner even though, stated that she was initially appointed

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 5 of 18

as substitute teacher at Tendongyan U.J.B. School with immediate

effect vide Order No. 2/30/70-ED(R)(1)(a), dated 30-11-1977 and

regularised with effect from joining duty vide order No. 2/5/77-

ED(P)(x), dated 08-11-1978, as well as, up-gradation of her

service to the post of Graduate Teacher vide order No. 46/2/87-

ED(Jr), dated 27-03-1992 with retrospective effect from 31-12-

1987, relevant copy of the order(s) are not found annexed in the

copy of the writ petition furnished to the Finance Department.

Hence, Finance Department cannot ascertain whether the

petitioner was appointed, regularised and upgraded her service to

the post of Undergraduate Teacher, in the absence of the orders

mentioned therein.

(ii) Placement of the petitioner, among others, on the

recommendation of Screening committee meeting held on 20-12-

1999, in the Senior scale of pay of Rs. 5500-9000/- effective from

03-12-1999 corresponding to the existing pay scale of Rs. 4500-

7000/- as shown at Sl. No. 4 under ANNEXURE ‘A’ of the order

No. 2/4-1/97-ED(ZEO/Z-1)(IV), dated 31-12-1999 was issued by

the Office of the Zonal Education Officer, IDZ-I, Manipur in view of

Government’s order No. 38/3(1)/95-SE(H/S), dated 14-07-1997

and No. 1/115/98-PIC, dated 11-01-1999 and 07-09-1999 (as in

ANNEXURE – A/4 to the Writ Petition). As such, Finance

Department has nothing to say.

(iii) As per Cabinet decisions taken on 02-03-2011 and 02-06-2011,

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 6 of 18

the Schools Education Department issued Order No. 31/5/2001-

SE(S), dated 03/06/2011 (as in ANNEXURE – A/5 to the Writ

Petition) thereby accorded sanction to the revision of scales of pay

of different categories of regular teachers whereby the Sr. Scale

of Untrained Graduate Teacher of the petitioner has been revised

after 12 years of regular service in the grade PB-2; Rs. 9300-

34800 + AGP 4100. AGP includes Grade Pay of Rs. 3400 plus

Academic Allowance of Rs. 700. Hence, Finance Department has

no more comments to offer.

(iv) In the Last Pay Certificate issued by the Head Mistress of

Khonghampat High School (as in ANNEXURE - A/6 to the Writ

Petition) calculation of pay of the petitioner has been made in the

scale of pay of Rs. 9300-34800 + AGP 4100 in respect of her

retirement effective from 31-12-2016 (AN) vide Order No.

46/3/2015-ED(V)Z-1, dated 24-07-2017 (as in ANNEXURE - A/7

to the Writ Petition) issued by the Directorate of Schools Education

(Valley Section). As such, Finance Department has nothing to say.

(v) Office of the Principal Accountant General (A&E), Manipur may be

clarified on the allegation of the petitioner in respect of calculation

of the pensionary benefits of the petitioner in the pay scale of Rs.

5200-20200 + GP 2800.

(vi) The clarificatory Office Memorandum No. 12(HC)/43/2018-SE(S),

dated 23/03/2019 (as in ANNEXURE A/9 to the Writ Petition) was

issued by the Schools Education Department with the concurrence

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 7 of 18

of Finance Department (Pay Implementation Cell) in respect of

calculation of pension for those teachers who opted the modified

ROP, 2010 vide Order No. 31/5/2001-SE(S) dated 03-06-2011.

Hence, Finance Department has no further comments to offer

(vii) On the basis of the clarification of the Office of the Principal

Accountant General (A&E), Manipur with regard to the mode of

calculation of pension in respect of the petitioner, the claim of the

petitioner may be considered.

[10] The submissions of respondent No. 4 are that —

(i) Examination of pension papers and service records is the

bounded duty of the office of the Principal Accountant General

(A&E), Manipur [Respondent No. 4]. It is found that the instant

petitioner was appointed as assistant teacher on regular basis with

effect from the date of joining duty in the scale of Rs. 215-340/-

(Matriculate Scale) vide DE(S)’s Order No. 2/5/77-ED(P)(I) dated

08/11/1978 (Annexure-A/1 of the present Writ Petition) and joined

duty on 17/11/1978. She was possessing requisite qualification

scale of Undergraduate Teacher scale of Rs. 260-500/- p.m. with

effect from 17/11/1978, i.e., from the date of his initial appointment

against her substantive post of Matriculate Teacher

retrospectively and also was upgraded to the post of Graduate

Teacher in the scale of pay of Rs. 1400-2300/- p.m. retrospectively

w.e.f. 31-12-1987 vide order No. 8/30/80-ED(VI) dated 27-03-

1992 (Annexure-A/2 of the Writ Petition). However, there was no

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 8 of 18

clarification/confirmation as whether the above orders were issued

with the concurrence of Finance Department in compliance to the

Rules 42-A of General Financial Rules, 1963 (now Rule 267 of

GFR-2005) read with the Government of Manipur, Finance

Department (PIC) O.M. No. 18/5/2005-FD(PIC) dated 10/10/2005.

(ii) “Those teachers who were given higher scale without following

due norms and procedure shall be allowed pension only as per

their substantive post as per the relevant RRS and ROPs” vide

Government order No. 12(HC)/70/2015-SE(S) dated 16-08-2016

and “the grant of scale of higher post (the so-called qualification

scale) to teachers under Education(S) Department, Manipur has

been cancelled with immediate effect” vide Government Order No.

32/1/2010-SE(S) dated 06-09-2016.

(iii) Hon’ble High Court passed an order dated 27-10-2018 in

Contempt Case (C) No. 65 of 2016 (All Manipur Elementary

School Teachers Association Vs. Shri H. Deleep Singh & others)

wherein the contempt petition was closed with the direction as

“whereas, those teachers who were appointed as Matriculate

automatically enjoy higher/pay/qualification scale of pay even

though the concern teachers had acquired higher qualification and

those teachers who were given higher scale without following due

norms and procedure shall be allowed pension only as per their

substantive post as per the relevant RRS and ROPs". As such,

her pension was finished/ settled at the respective scales of her

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 9 of 18

substantive post.

(iv) On receipt of the Government Order No. 31/5/2001-SE(S) dated

03-06-2011 (Annexure-A/5 of the Writ Petition), the Principal

Secretary (School Education), Government of Manipur was

requested for furnishing clarifications/decision on the doubt points

vide this office letter No. TM/1-946/ROP 2010 dated 01-02-2013.

Further, clarification on the anomalies of the regulation of pay

under the provision of the F.R. after sanction of the revision of

scales of pay along with Academic Grade Pay (AGP) of different

categories of School Teachers under the School Education

Department was also sought vide this office letter No. Pen-II/Edn-

5/Policy(AGP)/2012/780 dated 12-07-2016 and subsequent

reminder letter of even number dated 11-09-2017 and 06-02-

2018. However, the replies from the State Government are still

awaited. As and when decision/clarification from the State

Government is received with full justification, this office,

Respondent No. 4 will be revised as per their clarification as

necessary. As such, there is no pending action on the part of

Respondent No. 4.

[11] The submissions of respondent Nos. 1 & 3 are that—

(i) The service of the petitioner was regularised to the post of

Matriculate Teacher in the pay scale of Rs. 215-340/- p.m. vide

order dated 08-11-1978 (Annexure A/2 to the writ petition.

(ii) The next promotional post of Matriculate Teacher is Under

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 10 of 18

Graduate Teacher. The present petitioner failed to

disclose/enclose the particular date of order for promotion to

the post of Under Graduate Teacher. In this regard, it is to state

that the petitioner was regularised to the post of Matriculate

Teacher w.e.f. 08-11-1978 and she was upgraded to the post

of Graduate Teacher w.e.f. 31-12-1987 i.e. 9 years counting

from the date of her regularisation till the effective date of

upgradation. The minimum qualifying service for promotion to

the post of Under Graduate Teacher from the post of

Matriculate Teacher is 5 (five) years as per RR dated 25-08-

1970. In the order dated 27-03-1992 upgrading M. Nilabati Devi

to the post of Graduate Teacher, it is mentioned that she had

put in 8 years of regular service in the grade of Assistant

Undergraduate Teacher. However, the petitioner had only put

in 9 years of regular service from the date of her initial

appointment, on the date of her upgradation to the post of

Graduate Teacher. Therefore, it appears that she was not

promoted to the post of Undergraduate Teacher except matter

of allowing her to enjoy the qualification scale of pay attached

to the post of under Graduate Teacher.

(iii) Those teachers who were appointed as Matriculate teachers

are not entitled to automatically enjoy higher pay/qualification

scale of pay even though he/she had acquired higher

qualification. Those teachers who were given higher scale

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 11 of 18

without following due norms and procedure shall be allowed

pension only as per their substantive post according to the

relevant RRs and ROPs. The same is reflected in the

Government order No.12 (HC)/70/2015-SE(S) dated the 16-

08- 2016. Therefore, her pensionary benefit is to be calculated

as per her substantive post.

(iv) The Office Memorandum dated 23-03-2019 should be read

with Government order No.12(HC)/70/2015-SE(S) dated 16-

08- 2016 and the 50% of average emolument or last pay drawn

as mentioned in the OM should be applicable to the substantive

post held by the pensioner before retirement. Further, the

factual and law points involved in the present case are totally

different from the WP(C) No. 780 of 2017 and WP(C) No. 410

of 2018.

[12] The further submissions of the petitioner are that —

(i) The upgradation of petitioner from undergraduate Teacher post to

Graduate Teacher vide order dated 27-03-1992 (Annexure-A/3)

was issued after approval of the Government, and copy of the

order was issued to the Accountant General Manipur. And

obtaining of Finance Department concurrence and other

formalities are the duties of the concerned officials/ respondents.

And by the same order the corresponding under-graduate teacher

post which was held by the petitioner was also abolished. Further,

the order dated 16-08-2016, as in Annexure-R/3 to the affidavit-in-

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 12 of 18

opposition was issued for disposal of the representation filed by

the All Manipur Elementary School Teachers' Association

(AMESTA) is concerning to the petitioner of WP(C) No. 332 of

2015 and WP(C) No. 709 of 2010. However, the same was

superseded vide Government order No.32/1/2010-SE(S) dated

24-06-2017. The Government order dated 06-09-2016, as in

Annexure-R/4 to the affidavit-in-opposition was withdrawn/

cancelled by issuing order No. 32/1/2010-SE(S) dated 24-06-2014

in pursuance of the Cabinet decision dated 28-04-2017. And the

respondent No.4 by concealing the subsequent order dated 24-

06-2017 produced the order dated 06-09-2016 as in Annexure-R/4

so as to mislead the Hon'ble Court and defeating the writ petition.

(ii) The State Government with the concurrence of the Finance

Department (PIC) already issued office memorandum dated 25-

03-2019 (Annexure-A/9 to the petition) by giving clarification on

calculation of pension for those teachers who opted the modified

ROP, 2010 and retired from service, the applicable amount of

pension may be calculated as 50% of average emoluments or last

pay drawn i.e. 50% of pay in pay band plus AGP.

(iii) The service of the petitioner as substitute teacher was regularized

vide order dated 08-11-1978. And vide order dated 27-03-1992

her service was upgraded to the post of Graduate Teacher.

Therefore, the services rendered by the petitioner from the date of

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 13 of 18

regular appointment till upgradation to the post of Graduate

Teacher is 14 (fourteen) years and not 9 (nine) years.

[13] Mr. L. Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner was initially appointed as a Substitute Teacher vide order dated

30-11-1977 [Annexure A-1] issued by the Director of Education (S), Govt. of

Manipur and her service was regularized vide another order dated 08-11-

1978 [Annexure A-2]. Vide another order dated 27-03-1992 [Annexure A-

3] and on the approval of the Government, the service of the petitioner as

Assistant Undergraduate Teacher was upgraded to the post of Graduate

Teacher in the scale of Rs.1400-2300/- pm with DA and other allowances

as admissible under the rules with retrospective effect from 31-12-1987 and

abolished her Under Graduate post. The pay scale was fixed notionally with

not arrears of pay and allowances from 31-12-1987 to 31-03-1990 and

actual payment in higher scale with effect from 01-04-1990 as per RoP of

1990. Learned counsel further points out that by another Order dated 31-12-

1999 [Annexure A-4] issued by the Zonal Education Officer and with the

approval of the competent authority including the Finance Department, the

services of many teachers including the petitioner herein were placed in the

senior scale of pay with effect from the date indicated against them after

proper verification of their service records. The name of the petitioner was

placed at serial number 4 in Annexure “A” with date of regular appointment

as Graduate Teacher on 03-12-1987 and was placed in senior scale of

Rs.5500-9000 wef 03-12-1999 from the lower scale of Rs.4500-7000. It is

stated that by an Order dated 03-6-2011 [Annexure A-5] issued by

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 14 of 18

Education Department and published in Manipur Gazette on 14-09-2011,

Pay Scale of Untrained Graduate Teacher in Senior Scale after 12 years of

service was fixed as Rs.9300-34800 + AGP Rs.4100 [3400+700]. In terms

of the order dated 03-06-2011, the petitioner was placed in the pay scale of

Rs.9300-34800+4100. On superannuation wef 31-12-2017, the last pay

certificate reflects the said scale of Rs.9300-34800+ AGP Rs.4100 with pay

band of Rs.18700 and Gross amount of Rs.54,212/ -. However, in

preparation of pension book, the petitioner was placed in a lower pay scale

of Rs.5200-20200 GP-2800.

[14] Mr. L. Raju, learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner is

aggrieved by wrong fixation of her pension at a lower scale of Rs.5200

without any justification when she was already placed in a higher scale of

Rs.9300 by Government’s own order issued after getting all necessary

approval and after proper verification. It is urged that Office Memorandum

dated 25-03-2019 issued by Administrative Department (Education-S)

provided that the applicable amount of pension of regular teacher who opted

for modified RoP dated 03-06-2011 would be calculated as 50% of average

emoluments or last emolument, i.e., 50% of pay in the pay band plus AGP.

It is clarified that the petitioner had already opted for modified RoP 2011 and

as per Order dated 31-12-1999 [Annexure A-4], she was placed in the senior

scale of Rs.5500-9000 and as per Order dated 03-0602011 [Annexure A-5],

she was entitled to the higher scale of Rs.9300-34800+4100 and her last

pay certificate at the time of superannuation was also in the scale of

Rs.9300-34800+4100. Learned counsel submits that fixation of pay for

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 15 of 18

pensionary benefit at a lower scale if Rs.5200-20200+GP-2800 is totally

arbitrary. It is submitted that salary of a government employee cannot be

reduced except as punishment in a disciplinary proceeding for misconduct.

It is also stated that reduction of pay scale without notice to the employee is

illegal as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhagawan Shukla

v. Union of India: AIR 1994 SC 2480. It is vehemently submitted that once

the order for entitlement of higher pay had already been issued by the

employer after getting necessary approval from the competent authority and

after proper verification of entire service record, the authority now cannot

resile from such orders on the sole ground that such orders are not available

in the office record. Mr. L. Raju emphasizes that the duty of keeping record

lies with the employer and the employee is not responsible for non-traceable

of relevant order. An employee cannot be penalized for the lapse of officials.

Similarly situated employees have already given relief of pension at higher

pay @ 50% of last drawn salary in the judgement dated 08-08-2019 passed

by this Court in WP(C) Nos. 780 of 2017& 410 of 2018 and dated 19-06-

2020 in WP(C) No. 548 of 2018 and the orders have already been complied.

It is submitted that the present case is covered by these judgments which

attained finality. It is prayed that the pensionary benefit of the petitioner be

fixed on the basis of last drawn salary, i.e., Rs.9300-34800+4100.

[15] Mrs. Ch. Sundari, learned GA submitted that relevant copy regarding

appointment, regularization and up-gradation order(s) of the petitioner to the

post of Graduate Teacher annexed with the writ petition, are not found in the

files of the department and the same were issued without the concurrence

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 16 of 18

of the Finance Department. Hence, the petitioner was just holding and

receiving higher pay without following the rules and hence she would be

entitled to pension at the scale in the substantive post of under graduate.

Accordingly, fixation of pension on the basis of substantive post at a lower

scale is justifiable.

[16] Mr. S. Suresh, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4 has

submitted that those teachers who were given higher scale without following

due norms and procedure shall be allowed pension only as per their

substantive post as per the relevant RRS and ROPs” vide Government order

No. 12(HC)/70/2015-SE(S) dated 16-08-2016 and “the grant of scale of

higher post (the so-called qualification scale) to teachers under Education(S)

Department, Manipur has been cancelled with immediate effect” vide

Government Order No. 32/1/2010-SE(S) dated 06-09-2016.

[17] This Court has perused the materials on record, the

submission at bar and relevant law in this regard. The short issued involved

in the present case is “whether an employee who has been duly promoted

to higher pay scale vide order dated 31-12-1999 [A-4] and order dated 03-

06-2011 [A-5], can be denied the pay scale of the higher post without any

proceeding in this regard that too without issuing any notice?”

[18] It is seen from the record that the petitioner was initially

appointed as a substitute teacher vide order dated 30-11-2-1977 and

regularized vide order dated 08-11-1978. Then she was upgraded to the

post of Graduate Teacher vide another dated 27-03-1992 with retrospective

effect from 31-12-1987. Later on, she was placed in higher scale of senior

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 17 of 18

pay of Rs.5500-9000 with the approval of the competent authority and with

the concurrence of the Finance Department. Later on, she was given the

scale of Rs.9300-34800+AGP-4100 by another order dated 03-06-2011 and

she retired from service on 31-12-2017 with the same pay scale of Rs.9300.

It is also on record that Office Memorandum dated 25-03-2019 stipulates

that the pension will be calculated @ 50% of the last drawn pay band and

the said OM has been upheld by this Courts in WP(C) Nos. 780 of 2017; 410

of 2018 & 548 of 2018 by various orders which have attained finality. The

case of the petitioner is also similar with the facts of the above referred

cases. The only reason given by the authority for denying higher pay scale

is that the orders of upgradation to graduate post are not available with the

administrative department.

[19] This Court is of the opinion that the petitioner cannot be denied

the higher pay scale for calculation of pension only on the ground that the

department could not trace the relevant orders. This is the lapse of the

administrative department and the employee cannot be penalised for their

lapse. Moreover, it is the settled proposition of law the pay scale of an

employee cannot be reduced at his/her disadvantage , except for

punishment in a departmental proceeding. The effect of the order dated 31-

12-1999 [A-4] placing the petitioner in the higher pay scale along with others

on the approval of the competent authority including the Finance

Department, cannot be wished away by the employer that too on a flimsy

ground of non-existence of orders. This Court holds that the petitioner

cannot be denied the higher pay scale for calculation of the pension, unless

WP(C) No. 588 of 2021 Page 18 of 18

the earlier orders are cancelled or recalled by the authority after following

due process. The denial of the higher pay scale to the petitioner is without

any authority, arbitrary and untenable. It may be pointed out the issuing

authority cannot plead that the order issued by it is illegal, unless the same

is recalled by the same authority.

[20] In the circumstances, the writ petition is allowed and the

respondents are directed to calculate the pension of the petitioner on the

basis of last drawn salary, i.e., Rs.9300-34800+AGP-4100 and the whole

process shall be completed within a period of 3 months from the date of

receipt of a copy of this order. No cost.

[21] Send a copy of this order to the Director of Education (S), Govt. of

Manipur and Principal Accountant General (A&E), Manipur for doing

needful.

JUDGE

FR/NFR

Victoria