Incontinence

Sh Mahadevanji seems to have over looked the facts as under:-

1,Amending pension rules ---- Will SC reverse its order dated 31.3.2016 (paras 15,23,29 ......where SC '" have finally concluded, namely, that the resolution could not have been 
given effect to without framing a rule by the Central Government.'")

2. Withdrawal of IR .---- Please refer to para 27 of SC order dated 31.3.2016 where SC said:- ""Needless to emphasize, the aforesaid payment shall be subject to final results in the writ petitions." " Since DHC judgment has already been challenged in SC, it remains 

in-effective till final disposal by SC. 
3. Sh Mahadevan has also defended filing fresh Writ on the plea that benefit if granted will go to petitioners only citing MC Jain case ( which is quite different). He should know that 40% IR was paid to all eligible pensioners including the petitioners. His attention is also invited to para 28 of SC Judgment dated 31.3.2016, which inter alia states ...."" It does not require Solomon's wisdom to state that an interim order is an interim order 
and does not have any impact at the time of final verdict especially in such a situation and, therefore, we direct that it shall be applicable to 
the similarly placed persons. "" So all pensioners got the benefit.
Hope all concerned will see the WRITNG ON THE WALL, AND take remedial measures to achieve common goal..
H K Aggarwal