TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court Upholds High Court Order; Grants Parity of Pay to Former Advocate</h1> The Supreme Court declined to interfere with the High Court's order in SLP (CIVIL) NOS.17410/2017 and 8372/2018, upholding the decision without citing ... Retiral benefits from post of Member Trade Tax Tribunal (UPTT) - opposite parties refused to pay the pension - The simple reason given in the impugned order is to the effect that the services are not pensionary - HELD THAT:- There is no reason to interfere with the impugned order(s) of the High Court - SLP dismissed. Parity of remuneration with other members Member Trade Tax Tribunal (UPTT) - Judicial Member (advocate) seeking parity of pay with the other members who were in Government service - HELD THAT:- The High Court granted the relief of parity of pay to him with interest @ 6% from the date of his appointment which is of the year 1994. As the writ petition was filed in the year 2001, we modify the order of payment of interest @ 6 % p.a. of the arrears of salary w.e.f. the date of the filing of the writ petition. Issues:1. High Court's order interference.2. Parity of pay for a member of the Trade Tax Tribunal.Analysis:1. The Supreme Court, comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta, in the matter of SLP (CIVIL) NOS.17410/2017 and 8372/2018, declined to interfere with the impugned order(s) of the High Court. The Court dismissed the Special Leave Petitions without citing any specific reasons for interference, thereby upholding the High Court's decision. Any pending application(s) were also disposed of in this regard.2. In the case of SLP (CIVIL) NO.29091/2018, the respondent, a former advocate turned member of the Trade Tax Tribunal, had filed a writ petition seeking parity of pay with other members in Government service. The High Court granted the relief of parity of pay to the respondent with an interest rate of 6% from the year of his appointment in 1994. However, since the writ petition was filed in 2001, the Supreme Court modified the order, directing the payment of interest at 6% per annum on the arrears of salary from the date of filing the writ petition. The Court instructed the petitioner to clear the arrears of salary owed to the respondent within three months from the date of the judgment. The Special Leave Petition was disposed of, and any pending application(s) were also resolved accordingly.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
