https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172680 Pension under clause 2(a) had to be computed on the basis of the last emoluments actually received, because the definition of emoluments in Rule 62 was inclusive and could not be read as limiting pension to basic pay alone; dearness allowance and special allowances formed part of the relevant emoluments. The amounts payable under clauses 2(a) and 2(b) of Part III of the First Schedule to the High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954 could not be aggregated for revision, since clause 2(b) created a separate additional pension head and the revision order extended only to ordinary pension under clause 2(a). en-us Fri, 16 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Dec 2015 09:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172680 Pension under clause 2(a) had to be computed on the basis of the last emoluments actually received, because the definition of emoluments in Rule 62 was inclusive and could not be read as limiting pension to basic pay alone; dearness allowance and special allowances formed part of the relevant emoluments. The amounts payable under clauses 2(a) and 2(b) of Part III of the First Schedule to the High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954 could not be aggregated for revision, since clause 2(b) created a separate additional pension head and the revision order extended only to ordinary pension under clause 2(a). Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 16 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172680