A former Sainik School employee sought pension revision using grade pay applicable to serving employees after the Sixth Central Pay Commission.
Judge / Bench — Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar, Judge
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a pre-2006 retiree’s pension must instead follow the specific Central Government memoranda governing that class. The School Society’s adoption of the Commission on the Central Government pattern also attracted subsequent implementation instructions; separate adoption of every memorandum was unnecessary. Grade pay of ₹4,600, rather than the claimed ₹4,800, therefore governed the petitioner’s revision. His separate grievance about proportionate pension had already been addressed by sanctioning full pension. The writ petition was dismissed. Pension claims must identify the applicable retirement cohort and governing revision instruments.
Case — Raghuvir Singh Panwar v. Union of India and others · WP(C)/1619/2023 · 30 October 2026 · Jammu wing
Advocates appearing — Petitioner — Mr. Satinder Gupta, Adv. Respondents — Mr. Vishal Sharma, DSGI, with Mr. Karan Sharma, CGSC.