SC's split verdict on ex-HC judge's dual pension benefit

The Supreme Court has delivered a split verdict on whether a high court judge, who on retirement joins another organisation, is entitled to additional pension over and above what he or she is entitled to receive as a former judge.

A bench of justices R M Lodha and H L Gokhale who failed to arrive on a common view on the row has urged Chief Justice of India S H Kapadia to constitute an "appropriate bench" to determine the dispute.

In this case relating to Justice S K Dubey (retd) of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Justice Lodha held that the former was entitled to additional pension from the state government for his services as president of the State Consumer Forum after superannuating as a judge.

However, Justice Gokhale took a different view that Justice Dubey was entitled to only pension as a former judge of the high court and not for being the president of the forum as it was "impermissible" and contrary to the Constitution.

"In the instant case the order according sanction to pension does not prescribe any period for eligibility nor any rate at which the pension is to be paid.

"This is apart from the fact that as seen from the calculation sheet tendered by the first respondent, the subsequent period of his service as the President of the State Commission was sought to be clubbed with the period of his service as a high court judge, which is impermissible.

"Such an order for the benefit of an individual cannot be considered to be a valid one. Any such exception being made by exercising executive power would be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India," Justice Gokhale said.

The dispute arose after the State Accountant General declined to clear the additional pensioner benefits for Justice Dubey on the ground that there was no statutory rules for such payment and the executive order passed by the state government on April 5, 2002 was invalid.