2024 PLC(C.S)123

You are currently viewing 2024 PLC(C.S)123

Appellant was aggrieved of order issued by respondent / authority stopping his pension after his retirement on attaining age of superannuation—Judge in Chambers of High Court in view of bar contained in Art. 212 of the Constitution, declined to exercise Constitutional jurisdiction—Plea raised by appellant was that after retirement he ceased to be a ‘civil servant’, therefore, bar of Art. 212 of the Constitution did not apply—Validity— Pension was one of the terms of service of a civil servant, though it started with retirement- –Pension formed part of those terms and conditions to which civil servant joined the service—Question of jurisdiction of High Court was different from the question whether the respondent/authority had correctly withheld the pension of appellant— Latter aspect of the matter was always to be considered, in such cases, by the forum having jurisdiction to adjudicate upon matters—Question of delay, on account of pursuing remedy before High Court could also be seen by competent forum for which guidelines were available in number of judgments of Supreme Court—Division Bench of High Court declined to interfere in the matter as Judge in Chambers of High Court correctly appreciated the law on the subject— Intra Court Appeal was dismissed, circumstances.