M L JAIN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Special leave granted.

(2.) The Committee remained in existence till 4th October 1989 on which day the High Court quashed the notification under which it was appointed. Since the terms of the appointment of the appellant as a member of the Committee stipulated payment of lump sum honorarim of Rs. 40,000/ - for the entire work out of which the appellant had already received Rs. 20,000/-, what remained to be paid to the appellant was only a sum of Rs. 20,000/-. However, the appellant filed a writ petition before the High Court contending that from the date he ceased to be the Chairman of the Board of Arbitration and worked as a full-time member of the Committee from 3rd August, 1988 till 22nd March, 1990 till which date, according to him, the Committee remained in existence, he was entitled to remuneration as per the guidelines laid down in the Government of India's O.M. dated 8th October, 1987. According to these guidelines, the retired Supreme Court and High Court Judges appointed on Commissions / Committees of Inquiry or re-employed on whole-time basis by the Government of India were to get remuneration as follows: (i) Pay, which together with pension and pension equivalent of other forms of retirement benefits up to Rs. 8,000/ -in cash of retired High Court Judges w.e.f. 1-4-1986. (ii) Dearness Allowance as payable to officers of All India Services getting pay of Rs. 6,700/ - per month and above, either from the date from which it was admissible to sitting Judges or from the date on which they are appointed to Commissions / Committees of Inquiry. (iii) Compensatory (City) Allowance as would be admissible to the serving Judges of the High Courts at the head-quarter station of the Committee / Commission. (iv) Travelling Allowance and Daily Allowance etc. (v) Rent free furnished accommodation or house rent allowance at 12.5% of pay in lieu thereof. This O.M. also separately stated the remuneration which will be payable to the retired Judges re-employed on part-time basis.

(3.) The appellant, therefore, claimed that since he worked on the Committee for 37 months from 23rd February, 1987 to 2nd August, 1988 during which period he simultaneously worked as Chairman of the Board of Arbitration, he should be paid honorarium at the rate of Rs. 4,000/- per month and from 3rd August, 1988 to 23rd March, 1990 during which period he worked only on the Committee, i.e., as a full-time member of the Committee, he should be paid salary as payable to a retired Judge re-employed under the aforesaid Government of India's O.M. of 8th October, 1987.