The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has dismissed a retired Sainik School employee’s plea seeking higher pension fixation with a Grade Pay of ₹4,800 instead of ₹4,600 under the Sixth Central Pay Commission (CPC). The Court held that employees who retired before the implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission must have their pensions revised according to the specific government orders applicable to pre-2006 retirees.
Background
The petitioner, Raghuvir Singh Panwar, was appointed as Hostel Superintendent at Sainik School, Nagrota, on May 2, 1982. He subsequently served as an Assistant Master in the TGT (Senior Scale) category and resigned from service on September 30, 2003, while drawing a pay scale of ₹6,500–10,500 under the Fifth Pay Commission.
Following the implementation of the Sixth CPC, the petitioner claimed that his pension had been incorrectly calculated using a Grade Pay of ₹4,200 instead of ₹4,800. He also sought the benefit of full pension without proportionate reduction, arguing that the requirement of 33 years of qualifying service had subsequently been removed for pre-2006 pensioners.
The respondents submitted that the Government of India's Office Memorandum dated July 9, 2019, revised the applicable Grade Pay for pre-2006 pensioners in the relevant pay scale from ₹4,200 to ₹4,600. They further informed the Court that the petitioner's pension had already been revised accordingly and that he had also been granted full pension.
Justice Sanjay Dhar examined the pension revision orders issued by the Central Government and noted that the petitioner had retired before the Sixth CPC came into effect. Therefore, his pension could not be equated with that of employees who remained in service when the revised pay structure was implemented.
The Court observed that the January 28, 2013 Office Memorandum initially provided for a Grade Pay of ₹4,200 for the relevant category of pre-2006 pensioners. However, this was subsequently modified through the July 9, 2019 Office Memorandum, which substituted ₹4,600.
The Court observed:
"The petitioner having retired prior to the year 2006, cannot claim parity with those who have retired after the year 2006."
Rejecting the argument that government pension revision orders required separate adoption by the Sainik Schools Society, the Court noted that the Society had adopted the Sixth CPC on the same pattern as applicable to Central Government employees.
Justice Dhar further observed:
"Therefore, any Office Memorandum or instruction, which is issued by the Government of India bearing reference to implementation of 6th CPC becomes automatically applicable to the employees/pensioners of the Sainik Schools."
Regarding the petitioner's second grievance, the Court recorded that the respondents had already addressed the issue by granting him the benefit of full pension.
Finding no merit in the petitioner's claims, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed the writ petition and declined to grant the requested pensionary relief.
Case Details
Case Title: Raghuvir Singh Panwar v. Union of India and Others
Case Number: WP(C) No. 1619/2023
Judge: Justice Sanjay Dhar
Decision Date: 30 October 2026
