Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 37 (0.57 seconds)Article 16 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
D.S. Nakara & Others vs Union Of India on 17 December, 1982
However, in subsequent decisions this Court
has considerably watered down the rigid view taken
in Nakara's Case (supra), as observed in para 29 of
the decision of this Court in State of Punjab & Ors.
vs. Amar Nath Goyal & Ors. (1983) 1 SCC 305.
The All Manipur Pensioners Assn. ... vs The State Of Manipur . on 11 July, 2019
3. In view of the common question of facts and law
involved in CWJC No. 5192 of 2015 and analogous cases and
CWJC No. 4649/2019 and analogous cases, they have been taken
up together and heard on different dates. CWJC No. 4649 of 2019
was tagged with CWJC No. 13124 on 4.9.2019 and the State was
granted time to file supplementary counter affidavit after
examining the latest judgment of the Apex Court passed in Civil
Appeal No. 10857 of 2016 (The All Manipur Pensioners
Association Vs. The State of Manipur) disposed of on 11th July,
2019.
The Amending Act, 1897
Shanker Lal Choudhary vs Santosh Kumar Soni 22 Wpc/2569/2018 ... on 19 September, 2018
"75. Having given our thoughtful consideration to
the issue canvassed, and having gone through the
judgments cited, we are of the considered view, that
this Court has repeatedly upheld a cut-off date, for
extending better and higher pensionary benefits,
based on the financial health of the employer. A cut-
Patna High Court CWJC No.4649 of 2019 dt. 20-12-2019
95/113
off date can therefore legitimately be prescribed for
extending pensionary benefits, if the funds available
cannot assuage the liability, to all the existing
pensioners. We are therefore satisfied to conclude,
that it is well within the authority of the State
Government, in exercise of its administrative powers
(which it exercised, by issuing the impugned repeal
notification dated 2.12.2004) to fix a cut-off date, for
continuing the right to receive pension in some, and
depriving some others of the same. This right was
unquestionably exercised by the State Government,
as determined by this Court, in the R.R. Verma case
(supra), wherein this Court held, that the Government
was vested with the inherent power to review. And
that the Government was free to alter its earlier
administrative decisions and policy. Surely, this is
what the State Government has done in the present
controversy. But this Court in the above mentioned
judgment, placed a rider on the exercise of such
power by the Government. In that, the exercise of
such power, should be in consonance with all legal
and statutory obligations.
Shri Ram Krishna Dalmia vs Shri Justice S. R. Tendolkar & ... on 28 March, 1958
(ii) that differentia must have a rational relation to the
objects sought to be achieved by the statute in
question. (see Shri Ram Krishna Dalmia v. Shri
Justice S.R. Tendolkar & Others.: AIR 1958 SC 538)
The classification may be founded on differential
basis according to objects sought to be achieved but
what is implicit in it is that there ought to be a nexus
i.e., causal connection between the basis of
classification and object of the statute under
consideration. It is equally well settled by the
decisions of this Court that Art. 14 condemns
discrimination not only by a substantive law but also
by a law of procedure.
Indian Ex-Services League And Ors. Etc vs Union Of India And Ors. Etc on 29 January, 1991
"4. After summing up the concept of pension as above, the
Constitution Bench set out the challenge of the petitioners
in that case and indicated that the challenge was merely to
that of the scheme by which its benefits were confined to
Patna High Court CWJC No.4649 of 2019 dt. 20-12-2019
82/113
those who retired from service after a certain date. Even
though, undoubtedly the benefit of the scheme is available
only from the specified date irrespective of the date of
retirement of the concerned Government servants, it was
pointed out that all pensioners irrespective of the date of
their retirement constitute one class for grant of the benefits
of the liberalised pension scheme and no further
classification within them is permissible for this purpose
with reference to their date of retirement. This was stated
thus:
State Of West Bengal And Ors. vs Ratan Behari Dey And Ors. on 6 August, 1993
In fact, the Apex Court has examined the fixation of
cut-off date in the matter of grant of benefit in normal cases in the
case of State of West Bengal & Ors. Vs. Ratan Behari Dey &
Ors.: (1993) 4 SCC 62. The Apex Court has examined the
competence of the State or its instrumentalities as to the change of
the service condition including terminal benefits as well as
Patna High Court CWJC No.4649 of 2019 dt. 20-12-2019
84/113
pensionary benefits. The Apex Court has discussed the core
principle in paragraphs 4 to 10 which are relevant and quoted
hereinbelow: