SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 1069

G.B.PATTANAIK, K.RAMASWAMY
Secretary (Estt) Railway Board – Appellant
Versus
D. Francis Paul – Respondent


ORDER

Delay condoned.

2. The two petitioners in these cases were recruited as legal assistants after having put in more than 8 years practice at the Bar. One was recruited on April 24, 1963 and the other on July 3, 1964. After putting in qualifying service of 25 years, they retired from service on June 13, 1989 and March 31, 1992 respectively. They relied upon Rule 2423-A of the Railway Establishment Mannual II claiming addition of 5 years qualifying service for computation of their pension. The Tribunal in the impugned orders dated 6.12.1995 allowed the applications and directed computation thereof. The same are assailed in their applications.

Rule 2423-A reads thus :

"2423-A (C.S.R. 404-B) :-An Officer appointed to a service or post on or after Ist April, 1968 may add to his service qualifying for superannuation pension (but not for any other class of pension) the actual period not exceeding one-fourth the length of his service or the actual period by which his age at the time of recruitment exceeds twenty-five years or a period of five years, whichever is the least, if the service or post is one :-

(a) for which post-graduate research or specialist qualification, or experience in sci












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top