Civil Appeal No 1875 of 1988
From the Judgment and order dated l0121987 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Misc
Writ No 4434 of 1987
S N Kacker Gobind Dass EC Agarwala Ms Purnima Bhatt and VK Pandita for the Appellant
K Parasaran Attorney General Not Present Gopal Subramanium and Mrs section Dikshit for the Respondents
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DUTT J
After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties we grant special leave and as full and complete submissions have been made we proceed to dispose of the appeal on merits
The only question that is involved in this appeal is whether the 320 appellant DK Agarwal who was a member of the Higher Judicial Service under the State of UP to be precise the District and Sessions Judge Gonda and since retired on February 29 1985 was entitled to the super time scale
The appellant was appointed to the post of District and Sessions Judge on October 31 1983
In or about December
1985 the Selection Committee constituted by the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court and consisting of three Judges of that Court recommended the grant of selection grade to the appellant on the basis of merit as required under Rule 27 of the UP Higher Judicial Service rules 1975 hereinafter referred to as the Rules 
The Full Court approved the recommendation for the grant of the selection grade to the appellant and granted the same to him with retrospective effect from November 1 1983
In April 1986 the Selection Committee recommended for the grant of super time scale to the appellant under Rule 27A of the Rules It appears that the said recommendation of the Selection Committee came up for consideration before the Full Court on two occasions but the Full Court could not take any decision as each time KN Misra J who was then the Administrative Judge made certain new allegations against the appellant
On January 17 1987 again the recommendation of the Selection Committee came up for consideration before the Full Court for the third time
On that day the Full Court found the appellant unfit for a post in the super time scale as recommended by the Selection Committee
It however transpired that just on the eve of the Full Court Meeting held on January 17 1987 SK Dhaon J who was then the Administrative Judge wrote a secret letter to the Chief Justice which will be referred to presently
Being aggrieved by the decision of the Full Court turning down the recommendation of the Selection Committee the appellant filed a writ petition before a Division Bench of the High Court During the pendency of the writ petition the appellant made a representation to the High Court on its Administrative Side on April 13 1987 praying for reconsideration of the resolution of the Full Court dated January 17 1987
While no decision was taken by the Full Court at the meeting held on May 16
1987 an adverse entry for the year 1986 87 was recorded by SK Dhaon J On July 9 1987 as follows He creates trouble
He fomented a conflict between the members of the Bar and the subordinate staff of the courts 321 in Kanpur Nagar which ultimately resulted in the transfer of Sri Arjan Dev Mahajan the then District Judge Kanpur Nagar
This was done with an ulterior motive
He also instigated the subordinate staff of the courts in Kanpur Dehat to make agitations from time to time on the question of bifurcation of the staff between the courts at Kanpur Nagar and Kanpur Dehat
His integrity too is highly doubtful hence not certified
His work and conduct should be kept under constant gaze 
It so happened that the Chief Justice enquired into the allegations contained in the adverse entry
After such enquiry the Chief Justice as would appear from his minutes dated July 14 1987 found that the allegations had no foundation whatsoever and observed as follows I find from the Character Roll entries that Sri Agarwal had been given remarks and praise as District Judge Gonda in the years 1983 84 and 1984 85 and of course not much expression has been given in the entry of 1985 86 as the Hon ble Administrative Judge had no occasion to see his work
The entry doubting the integrity and involvement of Sri Agarwal in the Kanpur dispute that had arisen in 1986 obviously does not find support more so because it was given on 971987 on the eve of Full Court Meeting scheduled to be held on 1071987
I do not agree with the assessment as I regard Sri Agarwal as a very good able and competent administrator with an unblemished integrity
 In the earlier part of his minutes the learned Chief Justice stated as follows The members of the Bar informed that their view about the integrity and conduct of Sri Agarwal had already been expressed by the President Kanpur Bar Association  
A copy of the annual Magazine Kanpur Bar Association Kanpur was given to him wherein I find the following observations I will be failing in my pious obligation if I do not extend my heartfelt gratitude and thanks to Mr KK 322 Chaubey our most affectionate friend philosopher and guide and to Mr DK Agarwal a most compe tent and efficient administrator who has helped us a lot to create cordial atmosphere between Bar and Bench The Division Bench of the High Court in its judgment dated December l0 1987 noticed the remarks of the Chief Justice about the appellant as made by him in his said minutes dated July 14 1987
The Division Bench quashed the resolution dated January 17 1987 of the Full Court and directed that an opportunity should be given by the Court to the appellant of explaining the imputations made against him by the Administrative Judge in his letter sent to the Chief Justice just on the eve of the Full Court Meeting held on January 17 1987
Further it was directed that the case of the appellant for appointment to a post in super time scale should be reconsidered by the Court at a very early date keeping in view the fact that the appellant was to retire from service in February 1988
As the Division Bench did not grant the super time scale to the appellant but referred the matter back to the Full Court for reconsideration of the same the appellant filed the present appeal
During the pendency of the appeal in this Court the Full Court at its meeting held on February 20 1988 again rejected the recommendation of the Selection Committee for the grant of super time scale to the appellant
The question that arises for our consideration is whether the appellant who has since retired from service was entitled to the super time scale
There can be no doubt that whether a member of the Higher Judicial Service should be granted the selection grade or the super time scale is a matter exclusively within the administrative jurisdiction of the High Court
This Court will not ordinarily interfere with any decision of the High Court in such a matter
This is however subject to the exception that if in considering whether a member of the Higher Judicial Service should be granted the super time scale or not the High Court acts in violation of any rule framed by it or of the principles of natural justice or comes to any finding not supported by any reliable material this Court has to examine the matter for ends of justice
But interference does not mean granting of the relief which the High Court is entrusted to grant in its administrative jurisdiction
All that the Court will ordinarily do is to refer back the matter for 323 reconsideration of the High Court
In the instant case however we consider that for ends of justice we should interfere by disposing of the matter finally that is to say without referring it again to the High Court for the reasons stated hereafter
The letter of Dhaon J referred to above was handed over to the Chief Justice by Dhaon J just on the eve of the Full Court Meeting held on January 17 1987
In that letter certain serious allegations were made by Dhaon J against the appellant solely on the basis of what a retired Judge of the High Court had orally reported to Misra J The allegations contained in the said letter were not communicated to the appellant before the Full Court Meeting on January 17 1987 but the same were communicated to him before the Full Court reconsidered the matter in the meeting held on February 20 1988 pursuant to the judgment of the Division Bench
The appellant had denied the allegations made in the said letter against him
Upon such denial no attempt was made by the Full Court to have the comments of the retired Judge who had orally made the allegations against the appellant
There is therefore no material on record to form the foundation in support of the allegations and the Full Court in our opinion was not at all justified in acting on the allegations contained in the letter of Dhaon J We may now deal with the adverse entry of 1986 87 made by the Administrative Judge on July 9 1987 against the appellant
It has been already noticed that an enquiry was made by the learned Chief Justice and the allegations contained in the adverse entry have been found to be without foundation
Indeed the learned Chief Justice recorded that he regarded Sri Agarwal as a very good able and competent administrator with an unblemished integrity
In view of the minutes of the learned Chief Justice the Full Court was not justified in depriving the appellant of the grant of super time scale
Apart from that the adverse entry should not have been communicated to the appellant for his explanation on the face of the minutes of the Chief Justice
In this connection we may refer to the proviso to Rule 4B of the Rules which inter alia
reads as follows        
Provided that adverse remarks or strictures made by Administrative Judges about the judicial work and conduct of any officer of subordinate judiciary will be placed before the Chief Justice before issue
324 The rule requires that before an adverse remark is communicated to the concerned judicial officer it must be placed before the Chief Justice and in our opinion by necessary implication the rule requires concurrence of the Chief Justice for taking action on the adverse remark by communicating the same to the judicial officer concerned
In the instant case the adverse entry was communicated to the appellant even on the face of the minutes of the learned Chief Justice
In other words although the learned Chief Justice did not agree with the adverse remarks yet action was taken on the same by communicating the same to the appellant
This was done in utter violation of the proviso to Rule 4B and also in disregard of the minutes of enquiry of the learned Chief Justice
In this connection it may be mentioned that the allegations which were made from time to time against the appellant resulting in the postponement of consideration by the Full Court of the recommendation of the Selection Committee for the grant of super time scale to the appellant were all found to be untrue
We may mention about one instance when the Full Court could not consider the case of the appellant for the grant of super time scale at its meeting held on May 17 1986 because an oral accusation was made by the learned Administrative Judge that the appellant and his son were involved in smuggling activity while posted as the District Judge Gonda in the year 1985
The matter was referred to the District Magistrate Gonda who by his letter dated May 31 1986 informed the High Court that no such incident as referred to him had come to his notice wherein Sri Agarwal or his son might have been apprehended while carrying smuggled goods
Further it was stated by him that he had verified from the concerned records of different Police Stations which also showed that there was no mention of any incident involving Sri Agarwal or his son in such a matter
Thus the allegations made against the appellant or his son were baseless
After considering the above facts and circumstances we are satisfied that the appellant was entitled to a posting in the super time scale
We modify the judgment of the Division Bench and direct that as the appellant has already retired he shall be paid the monetary benefit of the super time scale with effect from January 1 1987
His pension shall be suitably altered on that basis
The payment shall be made within two months from today
The appeal is allowed
There will however be no order as to costs
NPV Appeal allowed


Summary:
Burmah Shell oil Storage and Distributing Company of India Limited had a non contributory pension fund
Consequent upon nationalisation of the petroleum industry this fund was taken over by the Government company respondent No 1 under section 101 of the Burmah Shell Acquisition of Undertakings in India Act 2 of 1976
In this writ petition under article 32 of the Constitution the erstwhile Burmah Shell Management Staff Pensioners claimed adequate escalation in their pension keeping in view the loss of purchasing power of the rupee and the general rise in the cost of living
In support of their claim they relied upon the steep escalation in the pension granted by the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation a sister concern to its employees
The latter has no such fund
It was contended for the respondent Company that if the escalation admitted by the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation is accepted as the basis for escalation in the respondent company there would be injustice or a burden would arise which they cannot discharge
Allowing the writ petition  HELD 1
The petitioners being the management staff of the Burmah Shell are entitled to a hike in the pension
316E F 2
Judicial notice can be taken of the fact that the rupee has lost its value to a considerable extent
Pension is no longer considered as a bounty and it has been held to be property
In a welfare state as ours 313 rise in the pension of the retired personnel who are otherwise entitled to it is accepted by the State and the State has taken the liability
In the instant case if the similarly situated sister concern like Hindustan Petroleum Corporation can admit appropriate rise in the pension there is no justification as to why the respondent company should not do so
316D E 3
The respondent company has an obligation to pay from its earnings into the fund and merely because the existing fund is not adequate to bear the additional liability the claim which is otherwise justified cannot be rejected
The company s current funds are available to supplement the pension fund
316C 4
Respondent No 1 to give to the petitioners hike in the pension effective from 1st May 1988 at the same rate as is being given by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation
If the amount available from the pension fund is not adequate the Government company would allocate appropriate funds to meet the demand
The additional pension to be disbursed latest by 31st of July 1988
316F G