Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Manmohan, Asha Menon, JJ.
Anuj Vohra - Appellant
Versus
Union Of India & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1007 of 2021; Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 2754 of 2021
Decided On : 27-01-2021
pro rata pension - Indian Air Force - The court directed the Indian Air Force to grant the petitioner pro rata pension, similar to the relief granted in previous cases, and to pay arrears of pro rata pension with interest if not paid within twelve weeks.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought pro rata pension claiming to be similarly placed as in previous cases and provided the requisite No Objection Certificate (NOC).
Finding of the Court:
The court disposed of the petition directing the Indian Air Force to grant pro rata pension to the petitioner if found similarly placed as in previous cases, and to communicate reasons in writing if not entitled, allowing further remedies.
Issues: Claim for pro rata pension, verification of entitlement, and communication of reasons if not entitled.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on previous judgments and directed the Indian Air Force to grant pro rata pension if the petitioner is similarly placed, and to communicate reasons if not entitled, allowing further remedies.
Final Decision: The Indian Air Force was directed to grant pro rata pension to the petitioner if similarly placed, and to communicate reasons if not entitled, with interest on arrears if not paid within twelve weeks.
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. - The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner in this petition claims to be similarly placed to the petitioners in Brijlal Kumar v. Union of India and others,2020 SCCOnLineDel 1477 and the petitioners in Govind Kumar Srivastava v. Union of India,2019 SCCOnLineDel 6425 (DB) [against which Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 8813/2019 has been dismissed on 26th April, 2019] and seeks the same relief as claimed therein i.e. of pro rata pension.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on enquiry, states that the requisite No Objection Certificate (NOC) has been filed along with the petition.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly states that subject to the right to verification and the right of appeal to the Supreme Court against the judgment in Brijlal Kumar (supra) being saved, the petition be disposed of.
5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of directing the respondents Indian Air Force that within twelve weeks herefrom, if they find the petitioner to be similarly placed as the petitioners in Govind Kumar Srivastava (supra) and Brijlal Kumar (supra) and other connected petitions supra, to grant him the same relief as granted in those petitions i.e. by payment of arrears of pro rata pension from the date of discharge till the date of payment and in future to continue to pay pro rata pension to the petitioner. However, if on verification it is found that the petitioner, for any reason, is not entitled to pro rata pension for reasons other than those stated in the judgments in Govind Kumar Srivastava (supra) and Brijlal Kumar (supra) and other connected petitions supra being in personam, the respondents, within the said twelve weeks, shall communicate to the petitioner, not so found entitled, the reasons in writing thereof and in which event, the petitioner shall be entitled to take further remedies there against.
6. If the arrears of pro rata pension are not paid within twelve weeks, the same shall also incur interest thereon @ 7% per annum from the expiry of twelve weeks till the date of payment.
7. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. Copy of the order be also forwarded to the learned counsel through e-mail.
The court upheld the right to pro rata pension for similarly placed individuals and emphasized the requirement for communication of reasons if not entitled, allowing further remedies.
The entitlement to pro rata pension was based on the petitioner being similarly placed as in previous cases, and the court directed the Indian Air Force to grant the pension if found entitled.
Entitlement to pro rata pension, verification of entitlement, provision for further remedies, and interest on delayed payment.
The court's decision was based on the entitlement of pro rata pension, verification of entitlement, communication of reasons for non-entitlement, and payment of arrears with interest.
The main legal point established is the entitlement to pro rata pension based on similarity to previous cases, communication of reasons if not entitled, and the payment of arrears with interest if no....
The court confirmed the right to verify eligibility for pro rata pension, mandating payments and establishing procedures for denied claims.
The court upheld the entitlement to pro rata pension for the petitioner, subject to verification and the right of appeal to the Supreme Court, and outlined the process for denial and further remedies....
The petitioner is entitled to pro rata pension if found similarly placed as previous petitioners, with interest on delayed dues.
The court's decision was influenced by the petitioner's claim to be similarly placed to other petitioners and sought the same relief of pro rata pension, along with the agreement of the respondents t....
The court's decision was based on the principle of granting relief of pro rata pension to the petitioner, similar to relief granted in previous cases, subject to verification of entitlement.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
