1.         Constitution of India, Art.  22 - There is no dispute that State has got an authority to implement the pension scheme by adopting any cut-off date - The said discretion certainly is not subject to judicial review unless and until some malafide is alleged or cut-off date fixed is apparently unreasonable or arbitrary - The said principle is not applicable in the present case because the petitioners had approached this Court for parity with the Government school teachers in the year 1984 - Claim of the petitioners had finally been crystallized with the formation of 2001 Rules, framed under Sections 8 and 24 of the Haryana School Education Act, 1995 - The pension scheme of the year 2001 is the result of continued struggle of the petitioners to get justice w.e.f. year 1984 - A right of parity had accrued - In case the petitioners are not held entitled to the benefit of pension scheme after having fought for it w.e.f. 1984, it will tantamount to setting at naught the fruits of the entire litigation and the results of the order obtained by them from the Court of Law  - Haryana Aided Schools (Special Pension and Contributory Provident Fund) Rules, 2001. (174) PLR 

Register SCeJ  Free Updates*

Supreme Court e@journal

Subscribe or take a 4 week FREE trial 

Note: Please fill out the fields marked with an asterisk.