The Supreme Court has issued notice on a writ petition filed by the Forum of Retired IPS Officers (FORIPSO), challenging the “Validation of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules and Principles for Expenditure on Pension Liabilities from the Consolidated Fund of India” contained in Part IV of the Finance Act, 2025. The petition contends that the provision is unconstitutional and violates Article 14 by creating an unfair distinction among pensioners.

 

The Forum has alleged that the retrospective amendment was introduced with the sole purpose of overturning the Delhi High Court’s judgment dated March 20, 2024, which had been subsequently affirmed by the Supreme Court on October 4, 2024. The High Court ruling held that pension cannot be differentiated based solely on the date of retirement, specifically between those who retired before and after January 1, 2006.

 

A Bench comprising Justice K.V. Viswanathan and Justice Prasanna B. Varale has sought responses from the Union Ministry of Law and Justice, Ministry of Finance, and Department of Pension & Pensioners’ Welfare.

 

The dispute dates back to 2012, when the petitioner organization approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), New Delhi, challenging the discriminatory pension structure introduced after the 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC). An Office Memorandum dated September 1, 2008 had led to a pay gap between pre-2006 and post-2006 retirees.

 

On January 15, 2015, the CAT struck down the memorandum as unconstitutional, relying on landmark rulings including:

• D.S. Nakara v. Union of India (1983)

• Union of India v. SPS Vains (2008)

• All Manipur Pensioners Association v. State of Manipur (2020)

 

The Tribunal reiterated that dividing pensioners by retirement date violates equality under Article 14.

 

Meanwhile, the 7th CPC also caused a similar disparity for pre-2016 retirees. That challenge is still pending before the CAT.

 

The 2015 CAT ruling was later affirmed by the Delhi High Court on March 20, 2024 in All India S-30 Pensioners Association v. Union of India. The High Court directed the Centre to:

• Grant revised pensions from January 1, 2006

• Clear arrears within 8 weeks (before May 15, 2024)

 

The Union, however, did not comply — leading to a contempt petition. The Government instead filed a Special Leave Petition, which the Supreme Court dismissed on October 4, 2024.

 

During contempt hearings, the Centre relied on Part IV of the Finance Act, 2025, asserting that the retrospective amendment nullified the High Court’s judgment and extinguished the obligation to pay arrears.

 

A Single Judge referred this question to a Division Bench, but FORIPSO challenged the reference, arguing the issue could not be reopened in contempt jurisdiction. On May 13, the High Court set aside the reference.

 

Another group of affected pensioners — All India S-30 Pensioners Association — also approached the Supreme Court via W.P. (C) 525/2025. Notice in that matter was issued on May 23, 2025.

 

On November 24, the Supreme Court directed that FORIPSO’s petition be tagged with W.P. (C) 525/2025, and both will be heard together.