M.L. JAIN & ANR. versus UNION OF INDIA
Paragraph 2(ii) of the government letter dated September 19, 1984 is inconsistent with Para 2(a) of Schedule I to the High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954. Pension calculation must use last pay drawn as Judge of High Court for entire qualifying service including judicial service, subject to statutory ceilings.
- Parties
- Petitioner: M.L. Jain; Petitioner: S.K. Jain; Petitioner: D.K. Garg; Respondent: Union of India
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 08 April 1985
- Procedural Posture
- Writ Petition / Original Jurisdiction
- Outcome
- Petition Allowed
- Legal Topics
- Pension Calculation for High Court Judges, Ceiling Limits on Pension, Interpretation of High Court Judges (conditions of Service) Act 1954
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
M.L. Jain
Petitioner
S.K. Jain
Petitioner
D.K. Garg
Petitioner
Union of India
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition / Original Jurisdiction
Legal Issues
- 1 How should pension for a Judicial Officer appointed as a High Court Judge be calculated under Part III, Para 2(a) of the First Schedule to the High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954?
- 2 Does government communication dated September 19, 1984 conform to the Act's provisions regarding pension calculation?
- 3 Whether the ceiling prescribed under Rajasthan Rules and clause (b) of para 2 of Schedule I to the Act is applicable?
Ratio Decidendi
Paragraph 2(ii) of the government letter dated September 19, 1984 is inconsistent with Para 2(a) of Schedule I to the High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954. Pension calculation must use last pay drawn as Judge of High Court for entire qualifying service including judicial service, subject to statutory ceilings.
Court Disposition
Petition Allowed
Orders
- Letter dated August 30, 1984 from Government of India to Chief Secretary, Delhi Administration quashed.
- Petitioner's pension refixed at Rs.21,500 per annum.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment