In Brief

The Supreme Court examined Special Leave Petitions challenging a High Court judgment that granted Board employees the right to pension/family pension and gratuity benefits under the 2009 Regulations, rejecting the State's exclusion of such employees from the 2008 Pay Commission benefits. The Court found that the earlier judgment in State of U.P. v. Preetam Singh, which held that conditions of service do not constitute Board functions, requires reconsideration as it overlooked key statutory provisions (Sections 8, 92, 94(2)(nn) of the 1965 Act). The Court concluded the State possesses jurisdiction under Article 162 to issue service-related directions and referred the matter to a larger Bench to clarify whether the Board's function includes employee service conditions."

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.