Back
MANMOHAN, ASHA MENON
Madasu Sampath Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. - C.M.No.1667/2021 in W.P.(C) No.2782/2019
C.M.No.1663/2021 in W.P.(C) No.4453/2019
C.M.No.1665/2021 in W.P.(C) No.2878/2020
Keeping in view the averments in the applications, the same is allowed and the writ petitions are taken up for hearing today.
W.P.(C) No.2782/2019
W.P.(C) No.4453/2019
W.P.(C) No.2878/2020
1. The petitions have been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that all the petitioners in these petitions claim to be similarly placed to the petitioners in Brijlal Kumar v. Union of India and others connected petitions,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 seek the same relief as claimed therein i.e. of pro rata pension.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners in these petitions, on enquiry, states that the requisite No Objection Certificates (NOCs) had been taken.
4. Learned counsels 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 Ku
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of the petitioners to pro rata pension in line with previous judgments.
The court established that similarly situated petitioners are entitled to pro rata pension, affirming rights based on precedent judgments and ensuring reasons for denial are communicated.
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 entitlement to pro rata pension for similarly placed petitioners as established in previous cases.
The court's decision was based on the entitlement to pro rata pension, subject to verification and the right of appeal to the Supreme Court if entitlement is disputed.
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 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 court upheld that petitioners similarly placed to prior judgments are entitled to pro rata pension benefits, mandating timely compliance by the respondents with specified conditions.
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
