K.VENKATASWAMI, G.T.NANAVATI, K.RAMASWAMY
State Of Punjab – Appellant
Versus
Manohar Lal Mirchea – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Nanavati, J.-Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the appellants. The respondent, though served, has not appeared either in person or through a lawyer.
2. The respondent, who had, by 2.4.56 7 years standing at the Bar, joined Punjab Civil Service (Judicial) on that date. He was subsequently promoted and became a member of the Punjab Superior Judicial Service. He retired as a District and Sessions Judge on 31.12.84. As he retired as a member of the Punjab Superior Judicial Service, for the purpose of determining his death-cum-retirement benefits the All India Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1958 applied to him. Accordingly his pension was fixed. On 22.2.90 the State of Punjab amended Rule 16 of the Punjab Superior Judicial Service Rules and made two changes. In respect of death-cum-retirement benefits of the members of that Service the Punjab Civil Service Rules were made applicable instead of the All India Service Rules which were applicable till then. Another change was in respect of direct recruits to the Service. In their case, the actual period of practice at the Bar not exceeding 10 years will have to be added now to his service qualifying for super
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.