Supreme Court: officer who accepted a post can't later challenge its pension-deduction rule

Lieutenant General (Retired) M.C. Bhandari was appointed Chairman of the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission in 2006 after retiring from the Army; his salary of Rs.26,000 basic pay was fixed after deducting Rs.17,627, the pension he drew for his earlier Army service, under Regulation 7(2) of the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission (Conditions of Service) Regulations, 2004. A second officer, Sohan Lal, appointed as Member after retiring as Additional Secretary, faced a similar deduction. Both challenged Regulation 7(2) as ultra vires Articles 14 and 16, and the directive principle in Article 39(d) (equal pay for equal work). The Uttarakhand High Court agreed, declared the Regulation ultra vires Article 14 read with Article 39(d), and ordered reimbursement.

The Supreme Court reversed, without ruling on the Regulation's constitutional validity. It held that both officers had accepted their posts with full knowledge that Regulation 7(2) applied, drew the reduced salary for over two years, and raised the challenge only at the fag end of their tenure; they were therefore estopped by acquiescence from questioning the Regulation. The Court held that a person who participates in a selection process, examination or appointment cannot later dispute the very rules under which they accepted the benefit. The High Court's judgments were set aside and the appeals allowed.