https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285535 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, a civilian clerk in the Army Ordnance Corps, in a case concerning the reduction and eventual cancellation of his disability pension without proper justification. The court held that the petitioner's pension constituted property under Article 31 of the Constitution, emphasizing his vested right to the pension that could not be unilaterally modified. It criticized the arbitrary deprivation of property rights and emphasized the need for lawful authority to deprive an individual of their property. The court set aside the order canceling the pension and awarded costs to the petitioner, underscoring the importance of upholding property rights and fundamental rights. en-us Thu, 04 Jan 1962 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Jan 2020 15:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285535 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, a civilian clerk in the Army Ordnance Corps, in a case concerning the reduction and eventual cancellation of his disability pension without proper justification. The court held that the petitioner's pension constituted property under Article 31 of the Constitution, emphasizing his vested right to the pension that could not be unilaterally modified. It criticized the arbitrary deprivation of property rights and emphasized the need for lawful authority to deprive an individual of their property. The court set aside the order canceling the pension and awarded costs to the petitioner, underscoring the importance of upholding property rights and fundamental rights. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 04 Jan 1962 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285535