SUNIL KUMAR CHAUDHURI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition the petitioner raises some questions relating to his entitlement about pensionary benefits and complaints of denial of the constitutional guarantee given to him at the time of his appointment as a Judge.

(2.) The facts which are necessary for the purpose of deciding the case do not contain much of a dispute and are narrated below: The petitioner was appointed a High Court Judge directly from the Bar to Patna High Court on 28th May, 1974. When the petitioner was appointed a High Court Judge, he was guided in matters relating to his pension by the High Court Judges (Condition of Services) Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the 1954 Act) as amended upto the date of his appointment. Under the said Act, Section 14 provides for matters relating to pension payable to the Judges. Relevant provisions of Section 14 of the 1954 Act are set out below: -

(3.) It appears from a perusal of Section 14 of the said Act that it refers to a Schedule. Under the said Schedule there are several parts and it is not in dispute that the petitioner comes in Part