##PAGE1##

REPORTABLE

2026 INSC 1194 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1614 OF 2011 STATE OF UTTARAKHAND THR. CHIEF SECRETARY AND OTHERS …APPELLANTS VERSUS M.C. BHANDARI AND ANOTHER …RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1615 OF 2011

J U D G M E N T

N.V. ANJARIA, J.

Both these Appeals, preferred by the State of Uttarakhand, involve similar facts and identical issues. Therefore, they are treated simultaneously for disposal by this common judgment.

2. Civil Appeal No.1614 of 2011 is directed against judgment and order dated 15.04.2010 passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand, Digitally signed by in Writ Petition No.182 (SB) of 2008, Signature Not Verified LOKESH ARORA Date: 2026.11.04 Reason:

Hereinafter, “High Court”

whereas the other Civil Appeal No.1615 of 2011 addresses the challenge to the judgment and order of even date passed in Writ Petition No. 181 (SB) of 2008.

2.1 Before the High Court, the original petitioners- respondent No.1 herein in each case prayed to declare Regulation 7(2) of the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission (Conditions of Service) Regulations, 2004² as unconstitutional and ultra vires Articles 14, 16 and 318 of the Constitution. It was next prayed to set aside order passed by the Finance Officer, Uttarakhand Government as well as the consequential order passed by the Secretary, Public Service Commission, by which the pension of the original petitioners in both the cases was ordered to be deducted from the admissible salary of Chairman and, as the case may be, the Member, of the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission³.

2.2 The third prayer was to direct the respondents to restore and fix the pay of the original petitioners without deducting their pension from the date of their appointment

Hereinafter, “Uttarakhand Public Service Commission Regulations”

Hereinafter, “Uttarakhand PSC”

as the Chairman or, as the case may be, the Member of Uttarakhand PSC in accordance with Regulation 7(1) of the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission Regulations. It was prayed for a direction against the respondents to pay the amount of salary of the original petitioners.

2.3 The High Court, allowing the writ petitions, declared Regulation 7(2) of the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission Regulations to be ultra vires the provisions of Article 14 read with Article 39(d) of the Constitution. Order dated 16.09.2008 impugned before the High Court whereby it was provided to deduct the pension from the salary of the original petitioners, came to be set aside. It was further directed that in case any deduction was made from the emoluments payable to the original petitioners as Chairman or, as the case may be, the Member of the Uttarakhand PSC on the basis of the aforementioned communication dated 16.09.2008 under Regulation 7(2) of the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission Regulations, the same shall be reimbursed.

3. Tracing the relevant facts from Civil Appeal No.1614 of 2011 treating the same to be the lead appeal, respondent No.1 herein – original petitioner Lieutenant General (Retired) Mr. M.C. Bhandari, retired from the post of Lieutenant General in the Indian Army with effect from 30.08.2006 upon attaining the age of superannuation. After retirement, he came to be appointed by the appellant-State as Chairman of the Uttarakhand PSC by order dated 03.11.2006. He assumed his duties of the post of Chairman with effect from

24.11.2006.

3.1 The salary of the said petitioner came to be fixed for the post of Chairman, Uttarakhand PSC at basic pay of Rs.26,000/- together with admissible allowances. The order of pay fixation contained a note that the pension payable to him on account of his previous services as Lieutenant General would be deducted from the salary payable for the post of Chairman. By order dated 19.12.2006, the Finance Controller, Uttarakhand PSC accordingly fixed the salary of the said original petitioner as Chairman of the Uttarakhand PSC after deducting Rs.17,