Feel free to contribute on burning issues concerning the armed forces. Contributions would be acknowledged - Use the 'Comments' tab or email navdeepsingh.india[at]gmail.com. No operational/business/commercial matters to be discussed please. Legal advice/litigation related issues would strictly NOT be published or discussed or entertained. Information on this blog is opinion based and is neither official nor in the form of an advice. This is a pro bono online journal in public service related to issues, policies and benefits, and the idea behind it is to educate and not to create controversy or to incite. Be soft in your language, respect Copyrights.

Sunday, January 27, 2013

Another landmark judgement on pension by the Apex Court

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has rendered yet another detailed landmark judgement on pensionary matters on 17 January 2013.

The SC has once again held that there can be no cut-off dates in pensionary matters, in the sense that two sets of retirees cannot be treated differently without there being a just objective.

In the instant case, the SC has held that the observation of the Division Bench of the High Court which had dismissed the pensioners’ petitions stating that retirees retiring after a particular cut-off date were only getting “a little higher” pension, was clearly not in order.

This is how the SC has dealt with the above:-

“…First and foremost, it needs to be understood that the quantum of discrimination is irrelevant to a challenge based on a plea of arbitrariness, under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.  Article 14 of the Constitution of India ensures to all, equality before the law and equal protection of the laws.  The question is of arbitrariness and discrimination.  These rights flow to an individual under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.  The extent  of  benefit  or  loss  in  such  a  determination  is  irrelevant  and inconsequential. The extent to which a benefit or loss actually affects the person concerned, cannot ever be a valid justification for a court in either granting or denying the claim raised on these counts.  The rejection of the claim of the appellants by the High Court, merely on account of the belief that the carry home pension for employees who would retire after 1.6.1988, would be trivially lower than those retiring prior thereto, amounts to bagging the issue pressed before the High Court….”

The SC has struck down the cut-off date of 01-06-1988 which obviously results in grant of full and equal benefits with arrears with effect from 01-06-1988 to the affected pensioners.


Col. Pardaman Singh said...


Does it mean that "ONE RANK ONE PENSION" both for civilians and Armed Forces is not far off.

Col Pardaman Singh

Anonymous said...

Maj Navdeep,
Should it resolve the discrimination
1.pre and post 2006 PENSIONERS
2.pre and post AVC I...LT COL (TS)/S
with 26 years of service vis-a vis
COL (TS) pensions
3.Pre and post 1-1-06 re-employment
officers remunerations
Hope MOD issues much needed orders
on the above issues.

Col GD Misra said...

Dear Maj Navdeep,
Will this judgement have an impact on 6th pay commission , 1/1/2006, before and after?
Col GD Misra

sunlit said...

This is most educative. Now is probably the most opportune moment for Maj Navdeep to advise all affected, and I know quite a few who are, about the implications, if any, of the judgement, specifically on the pre post AVS-I anomalies as mentioned at paras 4 & 5 of this blog post.

Natarajan V said...

This crucifies the discriminatory and obdurate attitude of the Departments/ its Lower and other associated Higher Functionaries of the bureau sufficiently and they must see the deeply entrenched justice in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution before perpetrating such repetetive practices! May the almighty endow them with a better understanding - as they also one day will become PENSIONERS in the same system.

CL BEDI said...

The basic crux of HSC judgement under reference is that an (artificial) division, among equals, can not be created based on flimsy unjustifiable grounds, in respect of their pension entitlement.

If such grounds are based on DA/DP as in instant case, then it should also hold true in case MOD tries to create similar divisions based on RP for pre/post 1986, 1996 or 2006 retirees.

To my mind this judgement takes us closer to justify our demand of OROP i.e. to allow same pension irrespective of point of time at which an officer (of same rank with same qualifying service) retires.

Therefore, Sqn Ldr Selaraj is quite right to that extant. It is good to be alert and be positive at the same time.

Let legal team of RODA ponder upon it and adopt suitable course of action.

Unknown said...

Will this judgement or any other help all those whose previously granted pension of 1st service is more than that of combined pension of two services

Anonymous said...

the iesm is non functional now. no updates in the web sites