9911796707
TMI Blog1976 (2) TMI 187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... December 19, 1966 of Narula, J. (as he then was) in Civil Writ Petition No. 298 of 1966 was affirmed. It appears that the respondent joined the Punjab Education Department (Class II) Service by direct recruitment as a senior lecturer in 1933. He was promoted to Punjab Education Service (Class I) on October 1, 1949. He was given the selection grade with effect from February 15, 1956 and in due course rose to the position of Director of Public Instruction cum-Secretary to the Government of Punjab, Education Department. He proceeded in leave preparatory to retirement on March 18, 1958.on attaining the age of superannuation. In June, 1961, he received a copy of letter No. 5137. Ed-I-60/9269 dated May 2, 1961 addressed by the sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rsession of the aforesaid latter dated May 2, 1961, of the Punjab Government, it had been decided to grant to the respondent a superannuation pension and death cum-retirement a gratuity of ₹ 440.18 per mensem and ₹ 18,927.50 np. in lump sum respectively under Rule 5.27 and 6.13 of the Punjab Civil Service Rules, Vol. II read with para 9(1) of the New Pension Rules, 1951. In para 3 of the letter, it was reiterated that a cut of 5% had been made in the pension admissible to the respondent as his service record which had been examined with reference to Rule 6.4 of the Punjab Civil Service Rules, Vol. II had not been satisfactory Aggrieved by this communication, the respondent filed in the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e by a mere executive order. It was further held in that case that the claim to pension was also property under Article 19(1)(f) of the Constitution and was not saved by Clause (v) thereof The learned Counsel appearing for the appellants has, however, made a feeble attempt to urge that no opportunity to show cause was required to be given to the respondent before passing the order imposing the cut in this superannuation pension and death-cum-retirement gratuity under Clause (a) and (b) of Rule 6.4 of the Punjab Civil Service Rules (Pension Rules), as the order was an administrative order and the case did not fall within the purview of Article 311(2) of the Constitution. It has been further contended by learned Counsel for the appellants tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) A.C. 40 that where a body or authority is characteristically administrative the principle of natural justice is also liable to be invoked if the decision of that body or authority effects, individual rights or interests, and having regard to the particular situation it would be unfair for the body or authority not to have allowed a reasonable opportunity to be heard. See : State of Orissa v. Dr. (Miss) Binapani Dei and Ors. (1967)IILLJ266SC and in Re H.K (An infant) (9)(1967) 2 O.B. 617. In the former case it was observed as follows: An order by the State to the prejudice of a person in derogation of his vested rights may be made only in accordance with the basic rules of justice and fairplay. The deciding authority. It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... significance of a decision in any particular case. 5. These observations were made with reference to an authority which could be described as characteristically administrative. At page 630 it was observed. It is true that the order is administrative in character, but even an administrative order which involves civil consequences as already stated, must be made consistently with the rules of natural justice after informing the first respondent of the case of the State, the evidence in support thereof and after giving an opportunity to the first respondent of being heard and meeting or explaining the evidence. This case and the English in re H.K. (An fant) were specifically referred to with approv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
