AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI
Md. Rahim Farooqui – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Union, of India.
2. The petitioner was appointed as a Presiding Officer in Debt Recovery Tribunal (D.R.T.) after his superannuation from service of Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service. Petitioners pension and other emoluments arising out of retirement had accrued to him before he came to be appointed on the present post. He was receiving pension is not in dispute. He is aggrieved by an order communicated to him by the Ministry of Finance dated 30.3.2006, contained in Annexure-5. By virtue of this communication certain objections has been raised on the salary bill payable to him by the concerned authority. This is the cause of action for filing of the present writ application.
3. In the communication, the petitioner has been directed to correct the salary bill in question by deducting gross pension from the salary bill instead of net pension which has been done by the petitioner. The salary bill had been returned to him twice over directing him to make correction by deducting gross pension instead of net pension which would be in consonance with the Rule 3(1) of the Central Civil Services (Fixation of Pay
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.