State Of West Bengal And Ors. vs Ratan Behari Dey And Ors. on 6 August, 1993
In my opinion, such an action can only be termed as most arbitrary and discriminatory and violative of article 14 of the Constitution, squarely governed by the decision of the Supreme Court not only in Nakara's case but also in the later cases relied upon by the counsel for the Corporation including the decision in State of W. B. v. Ratan Behari Dey (supra). It may be pertinent to observe that in the above decision the Supreme that in the above decision is made in respect of cut-off dates for certain pensionary and/or terminal benefits, the only question to be asked is whether the prescription of the date in unreasonable and discriminatory and that this question has to be decided by the Court having regard to the relevant facts and circumstances of each case. The Supreme Court in the above case, on a detailed examination of the facts and circumstances of the case, arrived at a finding that the prescription of the date was neither arbitrary not discriminatory. It was only in the light of above finding that it was held that the complaint of discrimination must fail. Exactly reverse is the position in the case before me. Here the question of deciding whether the date has been specified in a reasonable manner or not does not arise because the Corporation has placed no material whatsoever before me in that regard except the above decision of the Supreme Court, which to my mind, goes counter to the stand taken by it. It may be pertinent to observe here that what is binding is the ratio of a decision of the Supreme Court. A sentence picked up from the judgment of the Supreme Court here and there does not constitute the ratio thereof.