Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SHAMIMA JAHAN
Pradip Kumar Bhuyan, S/O- Late Hem Chandra Bhuyan – Appellant
Versus
Assam Power Generation Corporation Ltd – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. entitlement to salary and pension revision under rop rules. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. recovery notices contradicting supreme court judgments are unsustainable. (Para 7) |
| 3. formal quashing of arbitrary demand notices. (Para 8 , 9) |
JUDGMENT :
Shamima Jahan, J.
Heard Mr J Patowary, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr D Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate, APGCL, for the respondents.
2. By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed has prayed for setting aside and quashing of the Demand Notice No. MD/APGCL/PEN/M-16/184/78 dated 11.11.2024. The petitioner has also prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents, not to give effect to the said demand notice and also a direction to the respondents, not to insist for reimbursement of the excess amount paid.
3. The case of the petitioner is that the Revision of Pay Rules, 2017, came into effect on 01.04.2016, and the said rules were made retrospective and the persons who had retired before this ROP Rules came into force, would also be covered by the same. The petitioner states that he retired on 31st of March, 2016 and that in view of the retrospec
A demand notice seeking recovery of pensionary benefits is legally unsustainable when it directly contradicts a final judicial determination by the highest court affirming the entitlement to such pay....
Employees who retire before the implementation of revised pay rules cannot claim benefits under those rules; their entitlements must be determined according to the provisions applicable at the time o....
Employees who were in service on the effective date of revised pay rules are entitled to the benefits regardless of their technical retirement status, as per the interpretation of applicable rules.
The statutory force of rules, impermissibility of creating two classes of pensioners, and the discriminatory nature of the classification were the central legal points established in the judgment.
It is a well settled principle of law that statutory rules cannot be altered or amended by executive orders or circulars or instructions nor can they replace the statutory rules. The rules made under....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
