JUSTICE P. VENUGOPAL versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: [2003] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 286 · Decided: 01-09-2003 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.N. KHARE · Disposal: Dismissed
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
JUSTICE P.VENUGOPAL 
V. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
SEPTEMBER I, 2003 
B 
[V.N. KHARE, CJ., ASHOK BHAN AND S.B. SINHA, JJ.] 
High Court Judges(Salaries and Conditions of Service), Act, 1954: 
S.14-Pension-High Court Judge-Appointed as Commission of 
C Inquiry-After superannuation continued as Commission of Inquiry and 
also worked as ad hoc Judge-Pension fixed on the basis of the period 
he held office as High Court Judge-Claim for refixation of pension upon 
taking into account the period he held office as Commission of Inquiry 
and ad hoc Judge-Held, pension would be payable to a Judge for the 
D period during which he rendered his services as a High Court Judge, i.e. 
before attaining the age of 62 years-A High Court Judge is entitled to 
pension benefits only in terms of the Act and not otherwise-The Act does 
not contemplate grant of pension to a retired High Court Judge for holding 
any other office of profit-Clubbing of services for the purpose of 
computation of pension is not contemplated under the Act and, thus, the 
E court cannot by process of interpretation of statutory or constitutional 
provisions hold s<r- The pension payable to a High Court Judge would 
be only for the period rendered in that capacity which would constitute 
charge to the consolidated fond of India and services rendered subsequent 
thereto in terms of the order made by a State Government would not be 
F charged to the consolidated fund-The question as to whether such a 
person would be entitled to pension from the State concerned or not would 
depend upon the statute or the terms and conditions of appointment-
Constitution of India-Articles 112(3) (iii),22I,217 and 224A. 
G 
Justice Nand Lal Ganguly v. State ofUttar Pradesh and Ors., (Civil 
Misc. Writ Petition No. 18496 of 1999), overruled. 
Union of India v. K.B. Khare and Ors., (1994) Supp. 3 SCC 502 
and V.S. Mallimath v. Union of India and Anr., [2001) 4 SCC 31, relied 
Hon. 
286 
JUSTICE P. VENUGOPAL v. U.0.1. 
287 
Union of India and Ors. v. Pratibha Bonnerjea and Anr., (1995] 6 A 
SCC 765; Pasupati Nath Sukut Etc. v. Nern Chandra Jain and Ors. Etc., 
(1984] 2 SCC 404 and Pradvat Kumar v. Hon 'hie Chief Justice of Calcutta 
High Court, [1955] 2 SCR 1331, referred to. 
Constitution of lndia,1950: 
B 
Articles 217 and 224A-High Court Judge-After superannuation 
appointed as ad hoc Judge-Entitlement to pension-Held, an ad hoc 
Judge, in terms of the provisions of Articles 224A is only entitled to such 
allowances as the President may by order determine-A legal fiction, 
however, has been created therein in terms whereof he is not to be treated C 
as a Judge of the High Court except for the purpose of exercising his 
jurisdiction, powers and privileges-An ad hoc Judge is appointed for 
reasons specified in the notification issued by the President of India in this 
behalf-He does not become a part of the High Court-A person is not 
entitled to any further pensionary benefits after he demits the constitutional D 
office which he holds in terms of Article 217 of the Constitution. 
Article 141rlwArticle136-Special leave to appeal from a judgment 
of High Court not granted-Held, it would not render the decision as 
binding precedent in terms of Article 141. 
Kunhayammed and Others v. State of Kera/a and Anr., AIR (2000) 
SC 2587, relied on. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Special Leave Petition (C) 
No. 15450 of 2003. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 23.4.2003 of the Madras High 
Court in W.P. No. 11222 of 2001. 
Jayant Bhushan, B. Balaji and Satya Mitra Garg the Petitioner 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
E 
F 
G 
The petitioner is a former judge of the Madras High Court. He was 
appointed on 25.01.1979 and superannuated on 07.12.1981. In the 
meanwhile, by a notification dated 29.07.1981, he was appointed as 
Commission of Inquiry to inquire into the incidents which took place in H 
288 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2003) SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A Coimbatore Town on 23 .07 .1981 arising from attacks on the office 
premises of two Tamil newspapers 'Dinakaran' and 'Malai Murasu'. In the 
aforementioned notification dated 29.07.1981 it was stated : 
B 
c 
D 
"I am directed to say that the President requests Shri Justice 
P. Venugopal, Judge, Madras High Court to function as the 
Commission of Inquiry under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 
I 952 in respect of the incidents that took place in Coimbatore 
Town in Tamil Nadu on 23rd July, 1981. 
2. The time spent by Shri Justice P. V
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.