LexR. L. NARASIMHAM versus UNION OF INDIA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c D F G H R. L. NARASIMHAM v. UNION OF INDIA August 4, 1972 773 [S, M .• SIKRI, C.J., J. M. SHELAT, I, D. DUA, H. R. KHANNA AND K. K. MATHEW, JJ.] Govt. of lfldl_a A.ct, 1935. Sections 221 and 309 Govt. of India (High Court Judges) Ordtr 1937, Paras 18, 19 and 21-WheJher create a legal Jb/igation for the authorities and vested right in the High Court Judges to r«eive peruion, expressed in Sterling, converted to rupees at the nJarket rate of exchange. Co!Utltutlon of India Art. 221(2). High Court (Judges) Condltio!IS of Service Act 1954 (28 'of 1954) Sections 14, IS, 18 and 25, Scheduled t, Part I paras 4 arid 5-Whether these provisions preserve the 'benefit' of exchange rate 'guarameed' under 1937 order-Whether the constitutional provisions and 1954 Act afford /e:r.J favourable ·terms in matters of 'fhe exchange rate. Constitution of India, Art. 14---Wltether there \.\'as disc:rhninatio11 in matters of fixation of pension amongst the JCS Officers . . M. & D. the two ex-Chief Justices of Allahabad Hiah Court filed a W. P. in Allahabad H. C. for appropriate Writ and directions challengin~ the fixation of their pension in rupee and to re-fix the pension in accord· aoce with the provisions of the Govt. of India (High Court Jud11es) Order, 1937 in Sterling and then to. convert the same into rupees at the preaent market rate of exchange after the devaluation of rupee on Juno 6, 1966. D further claimed .a direction enabling him to clraw his pension at the Treasury in England in Sterlings. Both the1 petitions were dis· missed bv the full Bench of the Allahabad H. C. Thev appealed to this Court after obtaining the certificate of fitness, N field a W.P. under Art 32. of the Constitution claiming similar reliefs. In exercise of power u/s 221 r/w sec. 309 of the Govt. of India Aot. 1935, the' Governor General issued Govt. of India (H.C. Judges) Order. 1937. Schedule III to the Order expressed the pensions payable in Pound Sterlings. Para 21 provided "Pensions expressed in Sterling only shall. if paid in l~dia, be converted at such rate of exchange as the Secy. of State may from time to time prescribe". With the adoption of the Consti- tution in 1950, the services of the three Judges were continued under Art. 376 of the Constitution. Art. 221 of the Constitution provides for the salaries, leave etc. of Judges and continues th~ guarantees of not ,vary- ing salaries, pensions etc. to the disadvantage of the Judges, as guaranteed by Sec. 221 of the 1935 Act. Jn 1954, Parliament -passed an enactment regulating the salaries, pensions payable to the H. C. Judges including the Judges who belong to the J.C.S. Part I. Part II and Part III of the First Schedule gave different options to be elected by the Judges u/s 15 of the Act. In 1958, new paragraph 3 specifying in rupees the new sCale for additional pension was substituted for the original paragraph 3 of Part JI, in which J!Cnsion payable to an JCS Judge, had been expressed in Sterling only. Part I of the Sch. provide for the pensions payable in rupees only. Sec. 18 of the Act (reiterated provisions of para 21 of 1'937 Order) provided that pensions expressed in S'erling shall be convert- ed into rupees at such rate of exchange as the Central Govt. mav from 174 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1973) l S.C.'R. time to time specify in this behalf. Sec. 25(1) of the Act restated the £Uarantees in Art. 221 of the Constitution that the pension cond,itions shall not be varied to the disadvantaae of the Judges. M was &o,..,rned by Sec .. 14 of ihe Act r/w Art. 221 (2) of the Consti" tution as he was appointed the C.J. in 1947. D and N who were JCS Judges opted for the pensions to be paid according to the Part I of the First Schedule aunexed to the 1954 Act. They were appointed C.J. after 1954. Before this Court, the three ex-Judges contended that they had a riaht under the 1937 order to get the pension expressed in Pound Sterl- in&" and to convert the same into rupees according to the prevalent market rate, after the devaluation of the rupee. Thev further contended that the said ri&ht was protected and preserved by the Constitution and the 1954 Act, and that the fixation of their pension in rupees only was illegal, Dismissing the appeals, HELD : (i) N & D were appointed C.J. after 1954 and exercised the option in terms of Sch. I, Part I of the Act, which expressed pension in rupees only, M was governed by the pro,i
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.