M P CHINNAPPA Vs. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THREE former judges of this Court are seeking a writ of declaration declaring that the Karnataka Civil Service rules road with Government order No. FD (spl) 1 Pet 99, Bangalore dated 5-2-1999 (Annexure-G) in so far as it limits the gratuity payable to the petitioners to rs. 2,50,000/- as unconstitutional and illegal. They seek for a direction for a maximum gratuity of Rs. 3,50,000/- in the case on hand. All the three petitioners before elevation have worked as district and Sessions judges in various places. They wereiinitially elevated as Additional judges of this Court and thereafter they were made permanent in terms of the averments made in the writ petition. All the three judges have attained the age of superannuation and now they have retired from the office as a Judge of this Court. While fixing the pension, the respondents have chosen to take into consideration the maximum ceiling of Rs. 2,50,000/- in respect of gratuity in terms of the Government order dated 15-2-1999. According to the petitioners Sub-rule 3 of rule 19 of the Central Rules, the maximum gratuity payable is rs. 3,50,000/- and the same is not made over. They would say that the Judges elevated from the Bar are provided pension on the basis of a ceiling of Rs. 3,50,000/- and whereas in the case of elevation from the cadre of District Judges, a ceiling of rs. 2,50,000/- is taken into consideration. This according to themis in violation of Art. l4 of the constitution of India.

(2.) THIS Court issued notice to the respondents. The Central government has filed an affidavit staling that they have no objection for enhancement of DCRG benefits from rs. 2,50,000/- to rs. 3,50,000/- in the case of employees of All india Services' officers w. e. f. 1-1-1996. They would also say that the union of India has no objection for enhancing subject to the State government adopting the memorandum dated 18-2-1998. In fact they have enclosed annexure-R-1 dated 18-2-1998. No statement is filed by the State.

(3.) HEARD the Learned Counsel for the petitioner and the Learned advocate General appearing for the State.