Justice Azhahari Kamal Ramli, delivering the unanimous decision of a three‑member bench, said the matter was already settled by a previous Court of Appeal ruling in 2022.

Therefore, he said, the judicial review filed by Aminah Ahmad and 56 other retired civil servants – the respondents in the current appeal – was res judicata and constituted an abuse of court process.

However, the bench, chaired by Justice Lim Chong Fong and also comprising Justice Meor Hashimi Abdul Hamid, clarified that today’s ruling applied only to the 57 respondents in the present case.

In its 2022 ruling, the Court of Appeal annulled amendments made to the Pension Adjustment Act 1980 (PAA) in 2013 which gave retirees a flat 2% annual increment.

The appeals court said the 2013 amendments were unconstitutional as they placed civil service retirees in a less favourable position, contrary to Article 147 of the Federal Constitution.

Aminah, a former foreign ministry officer, and her co-respondents then filed the present judicial review application seeking that the High Court compel the government to adjust their pensions based on the pre-2013 formula prescribed under the PAA.

The pre-2013 formula required the government to revise pensions in line with the adjustments to the salaries of serving officers in the civil service.

In January 2023 the High Court granted the respondents’ application, giving rise to the present appeal. The order was, however, suspended pending the disposal of the present appeal.

In submissions previously, the government, represented by senior federal counsel Ahmad Hanir Hambaly, argued that retirees were not entitled to adjustments to their pensions as Service Circular PP 1/2016 merely constituted an “enhancement” of the civil service scheme, and was not a salary revision.

In its decision today, the Court of Appeal agreed with the government, noting that Aminah also failed to show she had suffered losses arising from the 2013 amendment, and had also failed to appeal on the matter previously.

With today’s judgment, the government is no longer bound to implement those adjustments.

Counsel Baljit Singh Sidhu, representing the respondents together with Gurpreet Kaur Pannu, said he had instructions to seek leave to appeal against today’s decision to the Federal Court.

Federal counsel Sallehuddin Ali also appeared for the government.