No. 18 of 1891).
2. Sobserve that
5.67
was
Mein Ordinance
passed, because
A. 4 of Ord. 18 of 1891 supposed to be
was
sanewhat ambiguous as regards the mode of calculating the pension due & tir
widow of
officer
under certain criemustame
who leaves the
fceases service & ceases to
contribute to the fund.
But I would point out that the basis
of the computation
prescribed in 5.4 of
Ord. 18 of 1891 in the
180
Same as
in s. 10
that prescribed of Ord. 30 of
the Illustrations
the methods
1890, and that the 121 process is explained
in paragraples 5 to
to 7
of assessing the of Schedule B of the Pensions contained in) latter Ordinance
3. It is not in
my
Opinion desirable
to treat the case
Amm
ffrier who
7
ceases to contribute
under the cricum.
8/1891 of 189
stances for described in 5.4 of Ord. 18.
favourably
more
than that of an officer who is transferred to another Colmy;
and this might
the result
of
#
the new or
میں
Le
Ordinance e were left in force.
in force Than
(no. 25 of 1895) Than
Therefor
to mistruct
Jon
T