SD Sharma's post in Chat-n-Chat column

Referring to Mr S D Sarma’s post, my view is that the although the SC order on 7/5/2015 was basically in respect of the CA against the Jaipur judgment, considering the fact that the other two CAs are also tagged with the former CA, any interim payment ordered should satisfy the original petitioners under all the CAs.

Although there are only 60 petitioners under Jaipur & Chandigarh judgments, as Delhi HC provides for ‘in rem’ benefits, the interim payment will be required to be paid to all Class I pensioners retired prior to 1/8/1997.

But the question is whether  they can restrict the interim payment to only Class I pensioners and also whether even pre-August 1997 pensioners will be paid only restricted benefits on  DR anomaly removal & 100% DR neutralisation while for pre_August 1997 retiree- petitioners under the Jaipur & Chandigarh writs upgraded pension will have to be paid. 

Again there is the question whether they can restrict  the interim payment only to pre-August 1997 retirees leaving the post -July 1997 retirees who too are suffering from pension discrimination.

In consequence, any interim payment short of upgraded pension for some pensioners and interim payment  with upgraded pension  for some others  and also based on cut-off date of 1st  August 1997 will  be discriminatory, which situation is sought to be done away with through the Civil Appeals.

I am sure that the written order of the SC will address such concerns. Let us wait and see.

With greetings,

C H Mahadevan