DEOKINANDAN PRASAD versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

DEOKINANDAN PRASAD versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

The right to receive pension is property under Article 31(1) and Article 19(1)(f), and cannot be unilaterally withheld by the State through executive order; the automatic termination under Rule 76 was based on incorrect facts and procedural violation of Article 311; denial of pension under Rule 46 was thus unfounded since its legal basis was the unlawful termination order.

Parties
Petitioner: Deokinandan Prasad; Respondents: State of Bihar & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
04 May 1971
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India / Supreme Court Final Judgment
Outcome
Petition allowed in part
Legal Topics
Right to Pension as Property, Maintainability of Article 32 Petition, Automatic Termination Under Service Rules, Pension Rules Interpretation, Article 311 Safeguards
Constitutional Law Service Law Right to Pension as Property Maintainability of Article 32 Petition Automatic Termination Under Service Rules Pension Rules Interpretation Article 311 Safeguards

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Deokinandan Prasad

Petitioner

State of Bihar & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India / Supreme Court Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether right to pension is property under Articles 19(1)(f) and 31(1) of the Constitution
  2. 2 Whether the order of termination under Rule 76 of the Bihar Service Code is valid
  3. 3 Whether denial of pension under Rule 46 of the Bihar Pension Rules is legal

Ratio Decidendi

The right to receive pension is property under Article 31(1) and Article 19(1)(f), and cannot be unilaterally withheld by the State through executive order; the automatic termination under Rule 76 was based on incorrect facts and procedural violation of Article 311; denial of pension under Rule 46 was thus unfounded since its legal basis was the unlawful termination order.

Court Disposition

Petition allowed in part

Orders

  • Order dated August 5, 1966 under Rule 76 of Bihar Service Code set aside and quashed.
  • Order dated June 12, 1968 denying pension under Rule 46 of Bihar Pension Rules set aside and quashed.