likewise he was entitled to payment under the gratuity act 1972.
was delivered by krishna iyer j. pathak j. gave a dissenting opinion.
but the trust deed companytained many regulations.
b. sawhney and b. p. ghosh for the intervener c. h. kewalramani .
being a number contributory member of the pension fund of burmah shell under the trust deed set up by it he earned his pension.
the numbermal annual pension under the regulations worked out to a sum of rs.
the bharat petroleum companyporation limited the companyporation for short as to whether a writ will issue under art.
these were the statutory rights which he enjoyed.
original jurisdiction writ petition number 1212 of 1977.
the quantum of pension was regulated by that scheme.
r. mridul m. k. ramamurthi and jitendra sharma for the intervener the petroleum workers union n. tiwari secretary of union for the intervener petroleum employees union .
petitioner in person.
b. pai o. c. mathur and k. j. john for respondent number 2.
markendeya and miss a. subhashini for respondent number 1.
the petitioner was also a member of the statutory scheme framed within the scope of the employees provident fund and miscellaneous provisions act 1952 and was entitled to provident fund payment on retirement.
under article 32 of the companystitution .
the petitioner retired voluntarily under an extant voluntary retirement scheme.
the judgment of v. r. krishna iyer and o. c. reddy jj.
krishna iyer j. three seminal issues arise in this little lis harbouring larger principles.
