K.S.BHATT
SUDARSHAN KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
DELHI TRANSPORT CORPOTATION – Respondent
( 1 ) PETITIONER seeks the following reliefs:
(A) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, order ordirection calling for the records which led to the passing of theimpugned decision (Annexure P-2) and the scheme notified videannexure P-l, declining to grant relief to the petitioner and on aconsideration of the submissions made in the present petition, thesame be quashed. (b) Issue an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus and certiorari orany other writ, order or direction quashing the decision contained inannexure P-2 rendered by the First Respondent. (c) Issue any other Writ, order or direction granting to the petitioner allother necessary and consequential reliefs, as are just and proper in thefacts and circumstances of the case.
( 2 ) IN substances the petitioner is aggrieved by the denial of the benefit ofpension which was made available to those who retired from service w. e. f. 3. 8. 1981under a Scheme introduced by Office Order No. l6 dated 27/11/1992. Inother words, the retrospectivity given to the Scheme was confined to those whoretired only but not extended to those who resigned. An artificial distinction hasbeen made between the p
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.