The Court held that a dispute regarding recovery of excess pension is a service matter under the Administrative Tribunals Act. It declined to entertain the writ petition and directed the petitioner to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal.
Petition dismissed; petitioner reposed to Central Administrative Tribunal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
(906) WP 6486-18.doc
Amk
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 6486 OF 2018
Shri Love Inder Berry .. Petitioner Vs. State Bank of India & Ors. .. Respondents
Mr. Arun Berry for the Petitioner. Ms. Jyoti Tiwari Patkar for Respondent Nos.1, 2 & 4. Mr. Suresh Kumar for Respondent No.3-UOI.
CORAM : R. M. SAVANT & K. K. SONAWANE, JJ. DATE : 21st AUGUST, 2018.
P. C. :
Digitally signed by Arjun Arjun Machhindra Machhindra Kadam Kadam Date: 2018.08.24 12:09:18 +0530
1/1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition regarding recovery of excess pension falls within the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226.
Love Inder Berry
State Bank of India & Ors.
R. M. Savant
K. K. Sonawane
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
