https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172700 SC upheld the validity of differential treatment between pension retirees and Contributory Provident Fund (P.F.) retirees, holding that they do not constitute a single class for Article 14 purposes. It emphasized that the Government's statutory obligation under the P.F. scheme ends on retirement, when rights crystallize, whereas under the pension scheme the obligation commences at retirement and continues for life. Consequently, liberalised pension benefits cannot be claimed by P.F. retirees as of right, and the cut-off dates and options granted to P.F. employees were found to have a rational nexus to the object sought to be achieved. No discrimination was established. en-us Fri, 13 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Dec 2025 12:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172700 SC upheld the validity of differential treatment between pension retirees and Contributory Provident Fund (P.F.) retirees, holding that they do not constitute a single class for Article 14 purposes. It emphasized that the Government's statutory obligation under the P.F. scheme ends on retirement, when rights crystallize, whereas under the pension scheme the obligation commences at retirement and continues for life. Consequently, liberalised pension benefits cannot be claimed by P.F. retirees as of right, and the cut-off dates and options granted to P.F. employees were found to have a rational nexus to the object sought to be achieved. No discrimination was established. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 13 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172700