Rules, Rights & Rites -133
I usually post all important items related to official rulings, union news, and other general matters on my YouTube channels: Yourskayveeyes (English) and Anbudan Kayveeyes (Tamil).
However, due to the recent spate of orders and the high volume of information being received, I have not been able to convert every item into a video. Therefore, I am introducing these new slots to post current matters and updates that have not yet been published on YouTube. This ensures you stay informed on every detail, even if a video hasn't been made yet …………….Kayveeyes
Supreme Court's decision regarding Dearness Allowance (DA) and Dearness Relief (DR):
• The case arose from a 2021 Kerala government order that sanctioned a 14% DA increase for Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) employees but limited Dearness Relief (DR) for pensioners to only 11%.
• After a single-judge bench initially dismissed the pensioners' plea, a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court ruled in favor of the retirees, leading the State and KSRTC to appeal to the Supreme Court.
• The Supreme Court held that the State cannot differentiate between serving employees and pensioners when enhancing inflation-linked allowances.
• The bench, comprising Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Prasanna B. Varale, observed that inflationary pressures hit both serving and retired employees with "equal force".
• Fixing a higher rate of increase for serving employees than for retired ones was declared arbitrary and a violation of the Right to Equality under Article 14 of the Constitution.
• The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals filed by the State of Kerala and KSRTC, upholding the pensioners' rights.
• The Court stated there is no "rational nexus" between the objective of countering inflation and the act of providing different rates of increase based on employment status.
• While the Court acknowledged that a "financial crunch" might justify deferring benefits or setting different implementation dates, it cannot justify fixing different rates of increase once the decision to provide them is made.
• The Court emphasized that these benefits serve a common purpose of countering inflation, which does not discriminate between a serving employee and a pensioner
Post a Comment