October 17, 2017

“The formula for calculating the pension as per the amended act is unreasonable, discriminatory.”

Retired Madras HC judge moves Apex Court for formula to remove disparity in payment of pension.

A former Madras HC Judge has approached the SC for implementing the ‘One Rank, One Pension’ (OROP) norm for retired all High Court Judges. He has pointed out that there’s disparity in the pension paid to those appointed from the Bar & those promoted from the subordinate judiciary.

Justice M. Vijayaraghavan has sought a direction from the Apex Court to the Centre to evolve a formula “to obviate the disparities in the pension payable to Judges drawn from subordinate judiciary & the Judges drawn from the Bar in tune with ‘One Rank, One Pension’ norms laid down by the Supreme Court in 2014 judgment in Ramakrishnam Raju’s case.”

The Petition, quoting the judgment observed that “when persons holding constitutional office retire from service, making discrimination in the fixation of the pensions depending upon the source from which they were appointed is in breach of Article 14 & 16(1) of the Constitution of India. One Rank, One Pension must be the norm in respect of a constitutional office.”

In fact, the judgment, which was based on complaints from retired judges, led to the HC & the SC Judges (Salaries & Conditions of Service) Amendment Act, 2016. This law amended provisions in the High Court Judges Act of 1954 & the Supreme Court Judges Act of 1958.

However, the petition, filed through adv. B. Balaji, contended that the amended law “highly discriminates” between judges drawn from the subordinate Judiciary & Judges drawn from the Bar in many respects relating to retirement pension.

The petition said, “The formula for calculating the pension as per the amended act is unreasonable, discriminatory.” It asked the Supreme Court to take the initiative to declare these provisions relating to pensions payable to retired HC judges in the 1954 Act as a “null & void”.