Telangana High Court: Re-employed Ex-Servicemen Cannot Claim Last-Drawn Military Pay as of Right

The Telangana High Court has ruled that ex-servicemen who take up civilian government jobs cannot automatically demand that their starting salary match the last pay they drew in the armed forces. A Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice Narsing Rao Nandikonda dismissed a writ petition by former Army and Air Force personnel who had joined the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) as Social Security Assistants.

Who Went to Court and Why

The petitioners had each served 18 to 20 years in the armed forces and retired before the age of 55. Between 2006 and 2012, they were appointed to EPFO under the ex-servicemen quota. They argued that their initial pay in the civilian post should have been set equal to the last pay they received in the Defence Services.

The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Hyderabad Bench, had turned down their original application and, in 2018, their review application as well. The High Court has now upheld both orders.

What the Petitioners Argued

The petitioners relied on the Central Civil Services (Fixation of Pay of Re-employed Pensioners) Orders, 1986, as amended by a Department of Personnel and Training Office Memorandum dated 5 April 2010. They pointed to paragraph 4(d)(i), which says that for ex-servicemen below Commissioned Officer rank who retired before 55, the whole pension and its equivalent retirement benefits are to be ignored when fixing initial pay on re-employment. In their view, this entitled them to pay fixed on their last-drawn defence salary.

The Respondents’ Position

The respondents accepted that pension must be ignored but said that neither the rules nor the instructions give any right to protect the last pay drawn in the Defence Services. They said initial pay is fixed at the entry pay in the revised pay structure that applies to direct recruits from 1 January 2006.

What the High Court Held

The Bench found that the petitioners had not shown any legally enforceable right to have their starting pay match their last defence pay. It noted that the authorities had fixed pay according to the rules and instructions for re-employing ex-servicemen below Commissioned Officer rank, and that the petitioners had not shown a breach of any mandatory rule.

The court rejected the idea that pay protection follows just because pension is ignored, calling that argument “devoid of merit”. Ignoring pension for fixing initial pay does not, it said, create a separate right to protect last-drawn armed forces pay.

Supreme Court Ruling Relied On

The High Court relied on the Supreme Court’s 2022 judgment in Union of India and Others v. Anil Prasad. The Supreme Court held there that a re-employed armed forces employee has no right to a pay scale equal to the last-drawn military pay. The last-drawn pay serves only as a ceiling: the pay worked out for the civil post must not exceed the basic pay last drawn in the armed forces, including deferred pay but excluding other emoluments.

Anil Prasad dealt with paragraph 8 of the 1986 Orders, which covers Emergency Commissioned Officers and Short Service Commissioned Officers. The Telangana High Court held that its underlying principle also applies to personnel below Commissioned Officer rank: without a specific provision, protection of last-drawn pay cannot be claimed as of right.

The court also upheld the CAT’s rejection of the review application, noting that a review cannot be treated as an appeal in disguise. The writ petition was dismissed and the CAT’s orders were confirmed.

Why the Ruling Matters

The judgment confirms that re-employed ex-servicemen who held posts below Commissioned Officer rank and retired before 55 cannot automatically claim parity with their last military pay in central government jobs. Pay fixation continues to follow the specific provisions of the 1986 Orders and related DoPT instructions. Ignoring pension in that process does not give a right to the last-drawn defence salary.

The decision is in line with the Supreme Court’s settled position and is likely to guide similar claims by ex-servicemen seeking re-employment in central government organisations.