Comments on SC JUDGMENT dated 16.05.2018 - 100% DR CASE

Swantanter Sharma  13 hours ago Shared publicly         The judgement totally relied on madrass high court jugdement.It has totally ignored the facts on which the kolkatta high court gave jugdement.Review petition be filled focussing on the creation of two different categories of retirees and also the facts or points rasied in kolkatta high court jugdement. Some senior advocate like sh bali ji be approached for further action in the matter as this judgement has not taken the points as mentioned in kolkatta high court judgement and only relied on madrass high court judgement. May be due to the facts that this bench has already upheld the madrass high court judgement.      Swantanter Sharma  14 hours ago Shared publicly         There seems to be error so far as related to 0.24%:at the start and 0.06 At the end in case of pre 11/2002 retirees and 0.18% in case of post 11/2002 retirees .The position is post 11/2002 retirees are getting da on revised basic pay ie previous basis pay enhanced by a portion of da.thus compairing of da @,24 And @,18 is not compareable while in judgement it is compared. This point has to be contested. Further no discussion should be on settlement but only on cut off dates . Also since no retirees were present in the salary negotiation hence these settlements are not applicable to retirees issues. Review petition needs to be filed .