SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Del) 1424

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Ex Nk Gd Bhagirath Singh - Appellant
Versus
Union Of India & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 12699/2021 & C.M. No. 39972/2021
Decided On : 12-11-2021

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Om Prakash Agarwal, Advocate, for the Petitioner; Mr. Tanveer Ahmed Ansari, Advocate, for the Respondents

The main legal point established is the application of mandamus to compel the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim for financial upgradation in accordance with relevant court judgments.

Headnote:

Mandamus - Financial Upgradation - The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim for the benefit of the second financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme in accordance with relevant judgments and dispose of the representation positively within twelve weeks.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought a mandamus to grant the benefit of the second financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme and consequential benefits based on relevant court judgments.

Finding of the Court:

The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim in light of specific judgments and dispose of the representation positively within twelve weeks.

Issues: Interpretation of relevant court judgments, application of mandamus, and disposal of the petitioner's claim.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on specific judgments and directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim and dispose of the representation within a specified timeframe.

Final Decision: The court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim and dispose of the representation positively within twelve weeks.

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J. (Oral). - The petitions have been heard by way of video conferencing.

2. Present petition has been filed seeking a number of prayers. However, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that a similar order as passed by a Division Bench in W.P.(C) No. 6437/2019 dated 30th May, 2019 be passed in the present writ petition. He clarifies that neither the judgment and order dated 30thMay, 2019 in W.P.(C) No. 6437/2019 nor the judgments referred to in the said order have been challenged before the Supreme Court by the respondents.

3. Issue notice.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents accepts notice. Learned counsel for the respondents states that in similar matters notices have been issued by the Supreme Court in the application for condonation of delay and Special Leave Petitions. He, however, candidly states that there is no stay in the said Special Leave Petitions.

5. It is pertinent to mention that the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition to primarily seek a mandamus to the respondents to grant the benefit of the second financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme in the Pay Band of Rs. 9300-34800 with Grade Pay of Rs.4200 w.e.f. 01st January, 2006 and wherever 20 years have been completed till the date the petitioner voluntarily retired on 30th June, 2006 or the dates mentioned in the prayer clause along with consequential benefits including arrears. The petitioner’s claim is based upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and Ors. Vs. Balbir Singh Turn & Anr., Civil Appeal Diary No.3744/2016 along with other cases decided on 08th December, 2017. The petitioner also places reliance on the decision passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Sunil Kumar Tyagi vs. Union of India & Anr., W.P. (C) No.3549/2018 decided on 01st May, 2019. He emphasises that SLP (Civil) No. 35888/2019, Union of India Vs. Sunil Kumar Tyagi has been dismissed by the Supreme Court vide order dated 15th November, 2019 and even a Review Petition against the said order has been dismissed on 27thJuly, 2021.

6. As admittedly there is no interim order passed by the Supreme Court in any of the Special Leave Petitions filed by the Union of India in similar matters, we dispose of the present writ petition in similar terms as passed in W.P.(C) No.6437/2019 i.e. a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner’s claim in the light of the judgments in Union of India and Ors. Vs. Balbir Singh Turn & Anr.  (supra) and Sunil Kumar Tyagi vs. Union of India & Anr (supra) as well as Union of India & Ors. vs. M.V. Mohanan Nair, (2020) 5 SCC 421 and to dispose of the representation(s) of the petitioner positively within twelve weeks from today. It is clarified that in the event the Supreme Court varies or set asides the order passed by the Division Bench in the present petition and/or any other similar matter, then the present order shall abide by the order(s) of the Apex Court.

7. With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition along with pending application stand disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top