V.S. MALLIMATH versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

Citation: [2001] 2 S.C.R. 567 · Decided: 21-03-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.B. PATTANAIK · Disposal: Dismissed
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

V.S. MALLIMATH 
A 
v. 
A 
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. 
MARCH 21, 2001 
[G.B. PATIANAIK, S.N. PHUKAN AND B.N. AGRAWAL, JJ.] 
B 
Service Law : 
National Human Rights Commission Chaitperson and Members (Sala-
ries, Allowances and other Conditions of Service) Rules, 1993: 
c 
Rule 3(b) proviso-Pension-Deductibility of-From salary-Retired 
Chief Justice appointed as Member, National Human Rights Commission 
(NHRC)-Pension received a< retired Chief Justice deductedfrom the salary of 
such Member-Validity of-Held: Sen,ice rendered by a Judge is a service in 
connection with thP affairs of the Union-Pension received by a Judge of High 
D 
Court has to be taken into account for determination of his salary as Member, 
NHRC-Hence, Pension received as retired Chi~{ Justice rightly deducted from 
his salary as Member, NHRC. 
Rule 10----Dratuity-Entitlement of-On re-employment-Retired Chief 
Justice of High Court appointed as Member, NHRC-Gratuity not paid for the 
E 
period of sen>ice rendered as Member, NHRC-Validity of-Held: The expres-
sion 're-employment' is not de.fined in Rules-Applying common parlance 
theory appointment of Member, NHRC amounts to 're-employment'-Hence, 
no gratuity payable for the period of service as Member, NHRC-All lndia 
Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1958, Rr. 16, 17 and 18. 
F 
Rule 4(2)-Leave encashment-Retired Chief Justice appointed as Chair-
man, Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT)-On retirement from Tribunal, he 
.. t 
was appointed as Member, NHRC-Such Member already availed 24q days 
encashment of leave as Chief Justice-No leai>e encashment for leave earned 
as Member. NHRC allowed-Validity of-Held : The expression 'previous 
G 
service' does not mean service as Chairman, CAT-No one is allowed to encash 
leave for a period more than 240 days-Hence, such Member not entitled to 
encashment of earned leave as Member, NHRC since he had already availed 
encashment of 240 days of leave as Chief Justice 
-..,.._ 
Word< and Phrases : 
H 
567 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
568 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2001] 2 S.C.R. 
"Govemment"-Meaning of-In the context of proviso to R. 3(b} of the 
National Human Rights Commission Chairperson and Members (Salaries, 
Allowances and other Conditions of Service) Rules, 1993. 
"Previous service"-Meaning of-In the context of R. 4(2) of the Na-
tional Human Rights Commission Chairperson and Members (Salaries, Allow-
ances and other Conditions of Service) Rules, I993. 
The petitioner, a retired Chief Justice of a High Court, was ap-
pointed as Chairman, Central Administrative Tribunal. On his retirement 
from the Tribunal, the petitioner was appointed as Member, National 
Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and continued there till the petitioner 
attained the age of 70 years. 
The pension received by the petitioner as retired Chief Justice was 
deducted from his salary as Member, NHRC under proviso to Rule 3(b) of 
the National Human Rights Commission Chairperson and Members (Sala-
ries, Allowances and other Conditions of Service) Rules, 1993. The peti-
tioner after retirement from NHRC was not paid his gratuity for the 
period of service rendered as Member, NHRC. The petitioner was not 
allowed to encash the leave that he earned as Member, NHRC. Hence this 
petition. 
On behalf of the petitioner it was contended that the pension could 
not he deducted from the salary of the petitioner as the services of the 
Chief Justice could not be held to, be a service under the Government of the 
Union or the Government of a State; that the petitioner's appointment as 
Member, NHRC could not be termed as 're-employment' and, therefore, 
the petitioner was entitled to gratuity under the All India Services (Death-
cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1958 and that the leave encash by the 
petitioner as Chief Justice should not be counted towards the ceiling limit 
of 240 days but only that encashed in his 'previous service' as Chairman, 
CAT ·Should be counted. 
G 
Dismissing the petition, the Court 
HELD : 1. It is difficult to accept the contention of the petitioner that 
the pension received by a Judge of a High Court shall not be taken into 
account for determining his salary as a Member of the National Human 
Rights Commission (NHRC) as the services or a Judge or a High Court by 
~ 
H 
no stretch of imagination, even though pensionable, can at all be intended 
V.S. MALLIMATH v. U.0.l. 
569 
to be excluded for determining the salary which such Member on retire-
A 
ment as a Judge or Chief
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.