JUDGMENT

Hansaria, J.-These review petitions were entertained on a grievance being made that while deciding the appeals in question reliance had been placed on some documents which had been annexed along with the written submission filed after the judgment was reserved, as permitted by the Court, because of which the review petitioners did not get opportunity to have their say on the applicability and relevance of the documents.

2. During the hearing of the review petitions it was not disputed by either Shri Salve or Shri Tripathi appearing for some of the review petitioners that the Office Memorandum of 1.8.1975 had been made applicable by the Ministry of Defence vide their letter dated 28.10.1975 to the Armed Forces pensioners also, as mentioned in para 6 of the judgment since reported in 1995(2) SCC 32. What was rather contended by Tripathi was that the denial of the Dearness Relief to the service personnel re-employed to posts under Central or State Government, without there being a similar provision for those re-employed in public sector undertakings or nationalised banks, is discriminatory. We are not impressed with this contention as it is known that Government employees form