MANMOHAN, ASHA MENON
Vimlesh Kumar Dangi – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. - Present petition has been filed seeking a number of prayers. However, learned counsel for the petitioners prays that a similar order as passed by a Division Bench in W.P.(C) No.6437/2019 dated 30th May, 2019 as well as WP(C) No. 12811 of 2019 decided on 06th December, 2019 be passed in the present writ petition. He clarifies that neither the judgment and order dated 30th May, 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.
2. Issue notice.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents accept notice. Learned counsel for the respondents state that in similar matters, notices have been issued by the Supreme Court in the condonation of delay and special leave petitions. They, however, candidly state that there is no stay in the said special leave petitions.
4. 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 First and Second financial upgradation under the ACP scheme with effect from completion of 12 years and 24 years and the third MACP on completion of 30 years of
The court applied the principle of mandamus and relied on relevant judgments to direct the respondents to consider the petitioners' claim for financial upgradation.
The court's decision was influenced by specific Supreme Court and Division Bench judgments on financial upgradation benefits under the ACP scheme.
The court's decision was based on the specific judgments cited by the petitioner and the absence of any interim order from the Supreme Court in similar matters.
The main legal point established is the reliance on precedent judgments and the absence of a stay in Special Leave Petitions influencing the court's decision.
Petitioners are entitled to financial benefits under ACP and MACP schemes based on independent assessments of previous judicial decisions, reinforcing the duty of administrative bodies to act within ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to direct the respondents to consider the petitioners' claim for financial upgradation in accordance with specific judgments.
Court directed respondents to consider petitioner's financial upgradation claims in light of previous judgments, stressing the need for consistency and timely processing.
The court's decision was based on the interpretation and application of specific judgments in the context of financial upgradation under the ACP scheme.
Court mandates adherence to judicial precedents in evaluating financial upgradation claims under ACP and MACP schemes, emphasizing timely resolution.
Court mandated consideration of financial upgradation claims based on established precedents, directing timely response to the petitioner.
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.