On the pension point, I agree that explanation giving in para 4 of
the ex
enclosure II to No 5 is reasonable.
In
there is no
G
any case, the fact remains that provision for addition to on abolition of office,
pension
and the
petitioners cannot, therefore,
cannot, therefore, be eligible
for such an addition.
The
reasts
10.48
mly doubtful print is whether para. 194 of the Hay Kay flaries Commission Report, 1947
(com α-6)-
رك
bad the
nother untidily worded recommendation
fum acceptet of the
in which ham
Grunge and
the S.
J S.
entities
servant still in
the??h Jon, equef,
Jon, cquet, the
evey Hong Kong for. same.
service
benefits 1 the toleries revision.
oo is windly guite way in equity
that the petitioner
who
neve fel
sel fort
in Hong Kong during the pairs of which
returspection benefits relate _1! Jan, 194),
ti! Jon, 184f
shred stain theme
benefiti
and I hope
wr
com support
the fremor.
3711