{"id":259911,"date":"2022-01-12T17:00:21","date_gmt":"2022-01-12T11:30:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=259911"},"modified":"2022-01-14T11:20:27","modified_gmt":"2022-01-14T05:50:27","slug":"pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/","title":{"rendered":"Pension is not a bounty; Lack of financial resources no excuse for taking away vested rights by way of retrospective amendments: SC"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Supreme Court<\/strong>: The bench of Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ has held that an amendment having retrospective operation which has the effect of taking away the benefit already available to the employee under the existing rule indeed would divest the employee from his vested or accrued rights and that being so, it would be held to be violative of the rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.<\/p>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>Factual Background<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">A Bank pension scheme was introduced by Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Limited, Chandigarh from 1st April 1989 and options were called from the employees and those who had given their option became member of the pension scheme and accordingly pension was continuously paid to them without fail and only in the year 2010, when the Bank failed in discharging its obligations, respondent employees approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court by filing the writ petitions. The Bank later on withdrawn the scheme of pension by deleting clause 15(ii) by an amendment dated 11th\u00a0 March, 2014 which was introduced with effect from 1st April, 1989.<\/p>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\">Analysis<\/span><\/h3>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Considering the facts of the case, the Court noticed that the employees who availed the benefit of pension under the scheme, indeed their rights stood vested and accrued to them and any amendment to the contrary, which has been made with retrospective operation to take away the right accrued to the retired employee under the existing rule certainly is not only violative of Article 14 but also of Article 21 of the Constitution.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Explaining the distinction between the legitimate expectation and a vested\/accrued right in favour of the employees, the Court observed that the rule which classifies such employee for promotional, seniority, age of retirement purposes undoubtedly operates on those who entered service before framing of the rules but it operates in futuro. <em>In a sense, it governs the future right of seniority, promotion or age of retirement of those who are already in service.<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court also explained by way of the following example,<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cIf a person while entering into service, has a legitimate expectation that as per the then existing scheme of rules, he may be considered for promotion after certain years of qualifying service or with the age of retirement which is being prescribed under the scheme of rules but at a later stage, if there is any amendment made either in the scheme of promotion or the age of superannuation, it may alter other conditions of service such scheme of rules operates in futuro.\u00a0 But at the same time, if the employee who had already been promoted or fixed in a particular pay scale, if that is being taken away by the impugned scheme of rules retrospectively, that certainly will take away the vested\/accrued right of the incumbent which may not be permissible and may be violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court also rejected the submission about the financial distress of the appellant Bank to justify the impugned amendment to say that it may not be possible to continue the grant of pension any more and observed that the rule making authority was presumed to know repercussions of the particular piece of subordinate legislation.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cOnce the Bank took a conscious decision after taking permission from the Government of Punjab and Registrar, Co-operative, introduced the pension scheme with effect from 1st\u00a0 April 1989, it can be presumed that the competent authority was aware of the resources from where the funds are to be created for making payments to its retirees and merely because at a later point of time, it was unable to hold financial resources at its command to its retirees, would not be justified to withdraw the scheme retrospectively detrimental to the interests of the employees who not only\u00a0 became member of the\u00a0 scheme but received their pension regularly at least upto the year 2010 until the dispute arose between the parties and entered into litigation.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court held that the non-availability of financial resources would not be a defence available to the appellant Bank in taking away the vested rights accrued to the employees that too when it is for their socio-economic security. It is an assurance that in their old age, their periodical payment towards pension shall remain assured.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cThe pension which is being paid to them is not a bounty and it is for the appellant to divert the resources from where the funds can be made available to fulfil the rights of the employees in protecting the vested rights accrued in their favour.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">[Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd v. Registrar, Cooperative Societies, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/ZSiosqIg\"><b>2022 SCC OnLine SC 28<\/b><\/a>, decided on 11.01.2022]<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>*Judgment by: Justice Ajay Rastogi<\/strong><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Counsels<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For petitioners: Senior Advocates Gurminder\u00a0Singh and K.V.Viswanathan, AORs Niharika Ahluwalia and Shalini Kaul<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For respondent: Senior Advocate P.S.\u00a0Patwalia and AOR Siddharth<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court: The bench of Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ has held that an amendment having retrospective operation which has <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121,"featured_media":259948,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[48329,3090,48328,48327,36085,33519,5161,20761,48330,26864],"class_list":["post-259911","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-accrued-right","tag-bank","tag-bank-employees","tag-coperative-bank","tag-financial-distress","tag-legitimate-expectation","tag-pension-scheme","tag-retrospective-operation","tag-socio-economic-security","tag-vested-right"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.4 (Yoast SEO v27.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Pension is not a bounty; Lack of financial resources no excuse for taking away vested rights by way of retrospective amendments: SC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Pension is not a bounty; Lack of financial resources no excuse for taking away vested rights by way of retrospective amendments: SC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court: The bench of Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ has held that an amendment having retrospective operation which has\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2022-01-12T11:30:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-01-14T05:50:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-31.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1333\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/01\\\/12\\\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/01\\\/12\\\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\"},\"headline\":\"Pension is not a bounty; Lack of financial resources no excuse for taking away vested rights by way of retrospective amendments: SC\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-01-12T11:30:21+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-01-14T05:50:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/01\\\/12\\\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":818,\"commentCount\":4,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/01\\\/12\\\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2022\\\/01\\\/MicrosoftTeams-image-31.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"Accrued right\",\"bank\",\"Bank employees\",\"Coperative bank\",\"Financial Distress\",\"legitimate expectation\",\"Pension Scheme\",\"Retrospective operation\",\"Socio-economic security\",\"vested right\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"Supreme Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/01\\\/12\\\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/01\\\/12\\\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/01\\\/12\\\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\\\/\",\"name\":\"Pension is not a bounty; Lack of financial resources no excuse for taking away vested rights by way of retrospective amendments: SC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/01\\\/12\\\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/01\\\/12\\\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2022\\\/01\\\/MicrosoftTeams-image-31.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-01-12T11:30:21+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-01-14T05:50:27+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/01\\\/12\\\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/01\\\/12\\\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/01\\\/12\\\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2022\\\/01\\\/MicrosoftTeams-image-31.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2022\\\/01\\\/MicrosoftTeams-image-31.jpg\",\"width\":1333,\"height\":888},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/01\\\/12\\\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Pension is not a bounty; Lack of financial resources no excuse for taking away vested rights by way of retrospective amendments: SC\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\",\"name\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2021\\\/04\\\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2021\\\/04\\\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2021\\\/04\\\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png\",\"caption\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\"},\"description\":\"Senior Associate Editor\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/editor_3\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Pension is not a bounty; Lack of financial resources no excuse for taking away vested rights by way of retrospective amendments: SC | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Pension is not a bounty; Lack of financial resources no excuse for taking away vested rights by way of retrospective amendments: SC","og_description":"Supreme Court: The bench of Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ has held that an amendment having retrospective operation which has","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-01-12T11:30:21+00:00","article_modified_time":"2022-01-14T05:50:27+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1333,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-31.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Prachi Bhardwaj","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/"},"author":{"name":"Prachi Bhardwaj","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942"},"headline":"Pension is not a bounty; Lack of financial resources no excuse for taking away vested rights by way of retrospective amendments: SC","datePublished":"2022-01-12T11:30:21+00:00","dateModified":"2022-01-14T05:50:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/"},"wordCount":818,"commentCount":4,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-31.jpg","keywords":["Accrued right","bank","Bank employees","Coperative bank","Financial Distress","legitimate expectation","Pension Scheme","Retrospective operation","Socio-economic security","vested right"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","Supreme Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/","name":"Pension is not a bounty; Lack of financial resources no excuse for taking away vested rights by way of retrospective amendments: SC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-31.jpg","datePublished":"2022-01-12T11:30:21+00:00","dateModified":"2022-01-14T05:50:27+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-31.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-31.jpg","width":1333,"height":888},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/12\/pension-is-not-a-bounty-vested-rights-retrospective-amendment\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Pension is not a bounty; Lack of financial resources no excuse for taking away vested rights by way of retrospective amendments: SC"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942","name":"Prachi Bhardwaj","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png","caption":"Prachi Bhardwaj"},"description":"Senior Associate Editor","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_3\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-31.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":268089,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/08\/2022-scc-vol-4-part-3\/","url_meta":{"origin":259911,"position":0},"title":"2022 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 8, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"2022 SCC Volume 4 Part 3, consists a very pertinent decision of the Supreme Court wherein it was held \u00a0that it cannot be said that the Tribunal will have jurisdiction only if the subject property is disputed to be a waqf property and not if it is admitted to be\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Cases Reported&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"SCC Part","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":298492,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/old-pension-scheme-or-contributory-pension-scheme-applicable-government-servants-madras-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":259911,"position":1},"title":"Old Pension scheme or contributory Pension Scheme, which will be applicable to Government servants appointed after 01-04-2003? Madras HC answers","author":"Apoorva","date":"August 4, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Because of the retrospective operation of the new pension scheme, no employer or employee would have forethought that appointments made after 01-04-2003 would not be eligible for the old pension scheme.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"madras high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/madras-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/madras-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/madras-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/madras-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":287234,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/03\/18\/employees-of-the-orissa-khadi-and-village-industries-board-not-entitled-to-pension-on-a-par-with-the-government-employees-supreme-court-sets-aside-orissa-hc-judgment-legal-rese\/","url_meta":{"origin":259911,"position":2},"title":"Employees of Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board not entitled to pension on a par with Government employees; Supreme Court sets aside Orissa HC judgment","author":"Apoorva","date":"March 18, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court said that even if development of Khadi and Cottage Industry is a Directive Principle of State Policy, it does not follow as a corollary that if the State establishes a Board or any organisation to carry out the obligations under such DPSP, it cannot make separate arrangements as\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-781.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-781.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-781.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-781.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":260383,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/20\/scc-online-weekly-rewind-episode-45-ft-bhumika-indulia\/","url_meta":{"origin":259911,"position":3},"title":"SCC Online Weekly Rewind Episode 45 ft. Bhumika Indulia","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 20, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=gBuQtabxYGI Supreme Court\u00a0 COVID-19\/Omicron surge yet again forces Supreme Court to extend period of limitation for filing of cases\u00a0\u00a0 After the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association approached the Court\u00a0in light of\u00a0the spread of Omicron, the new variant of the COVID-19 and the drastic surge in the number of COVID cases\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Legal RoundUp&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-233.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-233.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-233.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-233.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-233.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":6466,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/01\/14\/employees-voluntarily-retired-under-any-scheme-would-receive-no-subsequent-raise-in-pension-retrospectively\/","url_meta":{"origin":259911,"position":4},"title":"Employees voluntarily retired under any scheme would receive no subsequent raise in pension retrospectively","author":"Sucheta","date":"January 14, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Deciding the issue whether employees who had opted for voluntary retirement under the General Insurance Employee Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2004,\u00a0 and subsequently retired, would be entitled to get the benefit of additional pension under the notification dated 21.12.2005 retrospectively, the division bench of Anil R. Dave and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Supreme Court&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Supreme Court","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/supremecourt\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":272837,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/02\/retrospective-retroactive-quasi-retroactive-explained-ibc-statute-interpretation-legal-news-legal-updates-supreme-court-legal-research\/","url_meta":{"origin":259911,"position":5},"title":"Explained| Retroactive, True Retroactivity, Quasi-retroactivity, and Retrospective: Synonymous or distinct?","author":"Editor","date":"September 2, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cMerely because a law operates on certain circumstances which are antecedent to its passing does not mean that it is retrospective.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Supreme-Court-upholds-applicability-of-SEBI-Circular-but-gives-a-green-signal-to-Reliance-Commercial-Finance-resolution-to-avoid-unscrambling-of-resolution-process-1-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Supreme-Court-upholds-applicability-of-SEBI-Circular-but-gives-a-green-signal-to-Reliance-Commercial-Finance-resolution-to-avoid-unscrambling-of-resolution-process-1-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Supreme-Court-upholds-applicability-of-SEBI-Circular-but-gives-a-green-signal-to-Reliance-Commercial-Finance-resolution-to-avoid-unscrambling-of-resolution-process-1-1.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Supreme-Court-upholds-applicability-of-SEBI-Circular-but-gives-a-green-signal-to-Reliance-Commercial-Finance-resolution-to-avoid-unscrambling-of-resolution-process-1-1.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Supreme-Court-upholds-applicability-of-SEBI-Circular-but-gives-a-green-signal-to-Reliance-Commercial-Finance-resolution-to-avoid-unscrambling-of-resolution-process-1-1.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/259911","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/121"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=259911"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/259911\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/259948"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=259911"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=259911"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=259911"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}