Quantcast
Channel: Latest Supreme Court Judgments - AdvocateKhoj
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 13880

P. Ramakrishnam Raju Vs. Union of India [31/03/14]

$
0
0
[Writ Petition (Civil) No. 521 of 2002]. [Writ Petition (Civil) No. 523 of 2002]. The main question which arises for consideration is whether High Court Judges, who are appointed from the Bar under Article 217(2)(b) of the Constitution of India, on retirement, are entitled for an addition of 10 years to their service for the purposes of their pension? The above petitions have been filed by former Judges of the various High Courts of the country as well as by the Association of the Retired Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts elevated from the Bar. The petitioners have prayed that the number of years practiced as an advocate shall be taken into account and shall be added to the service as a Judge of the High Court for the purpose of determining the maximum pension permissible under Part-I of the First Schedule to the High Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act, 1954 (in short 'the HCJ Act'). It was further stated that in respect of Part-III of the First Schedule, which deals with the Judges elevated from the State Judicial Service, almost all the Judges get full pension even if they have worked as a Judge of the High Court for 2 or 3 years and their entire service is added to their service as a Judge of the High Court for computing pension under this Part. For this reason, the members of the subordinate judiciary get more pension than the Judges elevated from the Bar on retirement.

Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 13880

Trending Articles