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

1997 Supreme(SC) 382

K.RAMASWAMY, SUJATA V.MANOHAR
Radha Kishun – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


ORDER

This is an astonishing and more shocking case. The petitioner who was, admittedly, to retire on May 31, 1991 remained in office till May 31, 1994 as if he was not to retire from service, enjoying all the benefits of service.

2. This special leave petition arises from the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, made on November 26, 1996 in OA No. 652/95. The petitioner had joined the service in Tele Communications Department. Admittedly, his date of birth is May 13, 1933. On attaining the age of superannuation, he was to retire on May 31, 1991. Instead, he remained in service till May 31, 1994. When action was taken to recover the amounts paid to him for the period beyond the date he was to retire, viz., May 31, 1991 and to which he was not entitled, he filed OA in the Tribunal and the same has been dismissed. Thus, this special leave petition.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that since the petitioner has worked during the period, he is entitled to the payment of the pay and allowances from 1.6.1991 to 26.6.1994 and that he is also entitled to the payment of Provisional Pension, Death-cum-retirement gratuity, leave encashment, commutation of





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