Benefit of additional quantum of pension or family pension to retired Judges of Supreme Court and High Courts of India

The issue in this case was as to interpretation of Section 16B of Supreme Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act,1958 and Section 17B of High Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act, 1954 relating to additional quantum of pension and family pension, raised by Association of retired Judges of Supreme Court and High Courts of India.

To interpret a statute in a reasonable manner, the Court must place itself in the chair of a reasonable legislator. So done, the rules of purposive construction have to be resorted to which would require the construction of the Act in such a manner as to see that the object of the Act is fulfilled.

In selecting different interpretations, Court must adopt one that which is just, reasonable and sensible. A construction that results in hardship, serious inconvenience, injustice, absurdity or anomaly or which leads to inconsistency or uncertainty has to be avoided.

Section 16B of 1958 Act is worded in same terms as Section 17B of 1954 Act. Therefore, interpretation of Section 17B of 1954 Act would apply mutatis mutandis to Section 16B of 1958 Act i.e. expression “From” in each entry of scale provided under Section 16B of 1958 Act prescribing minimum age to be eligible for benefit of additional quantum of pension or family pension, will mean “starting point” of “the year” instead of “after” the completion of “the year”.

The claim of retired Judges of Supreme Court and High Courts of India Court for pension requires to be considered by interpreting word “From” as it appear in slab under Section 16B of 1958 Act and Section 17B of 1954 Act, to mean first day of entering minimum age to be eligible for pension as prescribed under slab i.e. 80, 85, 90, 95 and 100 years.