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

1998 Supreme(SC) 718

G.B.PATTANAIK, S.SAGHIR AHMAD
Union Of India – Appellant
Versus
M. S. Heble – Respondent


(1) THE Union of India is in appeal against the order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal. By the impugned order, the Tribunal had directed that the respondent should be paid the pension, and since the original respondent has retired in the meantime, the legal representatives should be paid the family pension. Admittedly, the applicant before the Tribunal was an officer in the Indian Police Service. Having joined in the service in the year 1948, he resigned from service with effect from 18-1-1968. From 1973 onwards, he has been making representation to the Union of India through the State Government that pension should be given to him in relaxation of the relevant provisions of the rules which clearly debars him from getting pension by exercising power under Rule 3 of the All-India Services (Conditions of Service-Residuary Matters) Rules, 1960 hereafter referred to as "the Residuary Matters Rules").

(2) THE State Government having considered the representation filed by the employee did recommend his case to the Union of India for necessary relaxation to the provisions contained in Rule 5 of the All-India Services (Death-Cum-Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1958 (he


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