Article 312A of CoI : Article 312A: Power of Parliament to vary or revoke conditions of service of officers of certain services.

Explanation using Example

Example 1:

Mr. Sharma was appointed to a civil service position by the Secretary of State in Council before the Indian Constitution came into effect. He continued to serve under the Government of India after the Constitution was enacted. In 2023, Parliament passed a law that changed the pension conditions for such officers, applying the changes retrospectively from 2010. Mr. Sharma's pension amount was reduced as a result of this new law. Although Mr. Sharma was unhappy with the reduction, he could not challenge the law in court because Article 312A(1)(a) allows Parliament to vary or revoke conditions of service, including pensions, retrospectively.

Example 2:

Ms. Verma, who was appointed to a civil service position by the Secretary of State before the Constitution came into effect, retired in 1965. In 2023, Parliament passed a law that altered the pension conditions for such retired officers, applying the changes retrospectively from 2000. Ms. Verma's pension benefits were reduced due to this new law. Despite her dissatisfaction, she could not challenge the law in court because Article 312A(1)(b) permits Parliament to vary or revoke pension conditions retrospectively for officers who retired before the Constitution (Twenty-eighth Amendment) Act, 1972.

Example 3:

Justice Rao was appointed as a Judge of the Supreme Court after having been initially appointed to a civil service position by the Secretary of State before the Constitution came into effect. In 2023, Parliament passed a law that changed the conditions of service for such officers, including remuneration and leave. However, since Justice Rao held the office of a Supreme Court Judge, the new law could not disadvantageously alter his conditions of service after his appointment as a Judge, as per the proviso in Article 312A(1).

Example 4:

Mr. Singh, who was appointed to a civil service position by the Secretary of State before the Constitution came into effect, had a dispute regarding his pension conditions based on an agreement he signed at the time of his appointment. He wanted to take the matter to court. However, Article 312A(3)(a) states that neither the Supreme Court nor any other court has jurisdiction over disputes arising from such agreements. Therefore, Mr. Singh could not pursue his case in court.

Example 5:

Mr. Kumar, who was appointed to a civil service position by the Secretary of State before the Constitution came into effect, continued to serve under the Government of India. In 2023, Parliament passed a law that changed the disciplinary procedures for such officers. Mr. Kumar was subjected to a new disciplinary action under this law. Although he felt the new procedures were unfair, he could not challenge them in court because Article 312A(1)(a) allows Parliament to vary or revoke conditions of service, including disciplinary matters, retrospectively.