Skip to content


Union of India Vs. Bidhubhushan Malik and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectConstitution
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberSpecial Leave Petition (Civil) No 9616 of 1983
Judge
Reported inAIR1984SC1177; 1984(1)SCALE643; (1984)3SCC95; [1984]3SCR550; 1984(16)LC816(SC)
ActsHigh Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954
AppellantUnion of India
RespondentBidhubhushan Malik and ors.
Advocates: K. Parasaran,; Attornry General,; R.D.Agarwala and;
Prior historyFrom the Judgment and Order dated March 2, 1983 of the Allahabad High Court in Writ Petition No. 3281 of 1979
Excerpt:
- section 100: [dr. arijit pasayat & a.k. ganguly, jj] substantial question of law - suit filed by appellants for declaration of title and permanent injunction restraining respondents from interfering with their possession of suit plot of land - concurrent finding of trial court and first appellate court was that the plot was never allotted to appellants in partition and they were in possession thereof; on the contrary respondents were in possession - held, high court rightly dismissed second appeal taking view that findings impugned in second appeal involved pure questions of fact and appreciation of evidence and no substantial question of law was involved, hence no interference was called for under section 100. .....schedule, the words 'and who has retired on or after the 1st day of october, 1974' are unconstitutional and are struck down. omitting the unconstitutional part it is declared that the judges (including the chief justices) of the high court are entitled to pension as computed under the high court judges (conditions of service) act, 1954, (as amended) irrespective of the date of retirement. the date october 1, 1974, continues to be relevant as being one from which the liberalised pension became operative under the high court judges (conditions of service) (amendment) act, 1976, irrespective of the date of retirement and hence there is no question of payment of arrears of pension for the period preceding october 1, 1974....2. for the reasons mentioned by the learned judges of the.....
Judgment:
ORDER

O. Chinnappa Reddy, J.

1. The Allahabad High Court has held:.The High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954, (as amended) shall be read down as under, in para 10 of the First Schedule, the words 'and who has retired on or after the 1st day of October, 1974' are unconstitutional and are struck down. Omitting the unconstitutional part it is declared that the Judges (including the Chief Justices) of the High Court are entitled to pension as computed under the High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954, (as amended) irrespective of the date of retirement. The date October 1, 1974, continues to be relevant as being one from which the liberalised pension became operative under the High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) (Amendment) Act, 1976, irrespective of the date of retirement and hence there is no question of payment of arrears of pension for the period preceding October 1, 1974....

2. For the reasons mentioned by the learned Judges of the Allahabad High Court in their Judgment, we agree with their conclusion and dismiss the special leave petition.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //