Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“The Furlough Scheme has to be read as a whole, and an employee cannot contend that the beneficial part of the scheme is admissible and the part which provides for furlough period not being counted towards retiral dues separately is not sustainable.”
Pay Minus Pension is a salary fixation method applied to retired government employees who are re-employed or appointed to new government positions after retirement. Under this rule, the employee’s monthly salary is adjusted by deducting the amount of pension they receive from their gross pay in the new job. Essentially, the employee is paid the difference between their new pay scale and the pension amount, preventing them from drawing a full pension and full salary simultaneously.
“Pension has always been characterized as a matter of right and not charity or bounty. When it comes to extending the benefit for the mentally disabled, the authority must exhibit alacrity. Such an approach alone would subserve and effectuate the benevolent object with which the statutory rules have been formulated. They should be seen as one more facet of Article 21 of the Constitution.”
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
“If pension was extended on the basis of length of service, the order of dismissal or removal from service would become meaningless.”
The Court noted that admittedly, before the respondent’s retirement, neither any departmental inquiry was initiated against him nor was any show cause notice issued to him.
The Court said that Government should have been sympathetic to the widow of a deceased soldier who died in harness instead of dragging her to the Court.
The Deputy Solicitor General of India (DSGI), filed a status report on behalf of the UT of Ladakh, stating that a committee is formed to identify the actual number of transgender individuals in both Leh and Kargil Districts.
It appears that petitioner has retyped his resignation letter by way of improvement as the original letter titled as ‘Regarding Resignation from Service’ submitted to respondent is hand-written, with different sentence and meaning.
The Court further stated that any step of reduction in the pay scale and recovery from a government employee would be like a punitive action because the same has drastic civil and evil consequences.
“Some of them are from District Judiciary retiring with a pension of only Rs 15,000/-. We are the guardians of the District Judiciary. As guardians of the district judiciary, what do we do?”
“Instead of helping the family of the missing solider, the Indian Army expects them to get the date of his civil death declared through civil Court, and they are denied to release the pension and other retirement allowances of the missing solider.”
The Court held that the Sikkim Government Pension Rules do not prohibit the revisionist from entering into a compromise deed with the respondent, therefore, the former is bound by the deed.
“If appellants wanted the seniority of respondent to be counted from a date of joining, then nothing prevented them from mentioning similar condition as was fixed regarding the pay and allowances with respect to seniority also.”
Rajasthan High Court held that retiral benefits are earned by employees for their services and should not be deprived due to non-job-related legal matters.
“Severance of employer — employee relationship can never be said to be an easy choice, for it not only results in the employee losing his livelihood, but also affects those who depend on him for their survival. And if the employer is the Indian Army, the loss is even greater, since it has the effect of suddenly displacing a soldier from the regimented lifestyle of the military”
Supreme Court: In an appeal against the judgment passed by Bombay High Court, whereby the Court dismissed the appeal preferred by the
Madras High Court, while noting that the respondent is 94 years old, directed MoHA to comply with the order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment.
“Pension is not a bounty from the state authority to the retired employee, it is compensation for the past service rendered by the employee. It cannot be withheld without assigning any reason”.
Madhya Pradesh High Court noted that the petitioner did not dispute her liability to refund the commuted portion in instalments, as per her undertaking.