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

1988 Supreme(SC) 519

S.NATARAJAN, A.P.SEN
M. L. Jain – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


Advocates:
A.Subhashini, K.PARASARAN ATTORNEY, Kuldip Singh, PRATIBHA JAIN, S.K.JAIN, TAPAS RAY

JUDGMENT

ORDER:— This is an application by Shri M. L. Jain, retired Judge of the Delhi High Court questioning the constitutional propriety and legality of the order issued by the Pay and Accounts Officer, Delhi Administration (High Court and Miscellaneous), New Delhi dated July 12, 1988 purporting to fix his pension at Rs. 26,000 per annurn and for an appropriate direction for re-determination of his pension and other pensionary benefits in view of the change in law brought about by High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Amendment Acts, 1986 and 1988 (Act Nos. 38 of 1986 and 20 of 1988). This order must in continuation of the earlier order delivered by this Court in M. L Jain v. Union of India, (1985) 2 SCC 355: (AIR 1985 SC 619) by which this Court made a direction for payment of pension to the petitioner at Rs. 21,500 per annum in view of the two ceilings then operating against him, viz. (a) a ceiling under the Rajasthan Rules providing that the maximum amount of pension should not exceed Rs. 1,500 per annum* and (b) that under cl. (is) of Paragraph 2 of Part III of the First Schedule of the High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954.

* or Rs. 1500 per month - Ed.

2. Ac










































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