JUDGMENT

Mini Pushkarna, J. The present writ petition has been filed for directions to respondent No.2 to grant the benefit of the ex gratia Scheme to the petitioner, with further prayer for quashing and striking down Clauses 6(i), 6(xiv) and 6(xxii) of the said Scheme. Since the petitioner expired in the year 2016, the present petition has now been continued through his legal representative, i.e., wife of the deceased petitioner.

2. The respondent No.2 had introduced a Scheme effective from 01.04.2008, under which a monthly amount is paid to the retired and other ex-employees of respondent No.2. After the death of the retiree/ex-employee, his/her surviving spouse receives the said payment till his/her death. As per the said ex gratia Scheme known as "Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited Monthly Ex Gratia Scheme" (Ex Gratia Scheme), the same is applicable to all the ex-employees who have completed minimum 15 years of continued service with the respondent and who had joined the service of the respondent No.2 on or before 31.03.2008.

3. Since the petitioner joined the service of respondent No.2 before 31.03.2008 and had superannuated in the year 2005 on 30.04.2005, the petitioner duly applied for availing benefit of the said Ex Gratia Scheme. However, respondent No.2 refused to extend the benefit of the said Scheme to the petitioner and insisted the petitioner to first withdraw the suit filed by the petitioner against respondent No.2, before his application under the said Scheme was considered. The petitioner received an email dated 25.03.2009 from respondent No.2, which reads as under:

[IMG]

4. The aforesaid email message dated 25.03.2009 was recalled by an email message dated 26.03.2009. Later on another email message dated 06.04.2009 was received by the petitioner from respondent No.2, wherein the petitioner was informed that ex-employees who have any litigation against the respondent No.2, are not eligible under the said Ex Gratia Scheme. The email dated 06.04.2009 sent by respondent No.2 to the petitioner is reproduced as below:

[IMG]

5. Since the benefit of the Ex Gratia Scheme was not extended to the petitioner, the present writ petition came to be filed.

6. On behalf of the petitioner, it is submitted that the Scheme stipulates that the same would not be applicable to an employee who had entered into litigation for pension or superannuation scheme. It is submitted that the petitioner had not initiated any litigation qua the pension or superannuation against respondent No.2. As such there was no embargo against the petitioner for his entitlement or eligibility for benefit under the Ex Gratia Scheme.

7. It is submitted that in the year 1994, petitioner was allotted a residential accommodation by respondent No.2 being property No. A-10, First Floor, South Extension-II, New Delhi, wherein the petitioner resided with his family till 25.10.2004. The said property was not owned by the respondent, but the same was taken on lease by respondent No.2 and was being allotted to employees of respondent No.2 from time to time. The respondent No.2 was also deducting occupancy charges from the monthly salary of petitioner in accordance with the Service Rules.

8. It is submitted that wife of the petitioner was a doctor, while son of the petitioner was studying Engineering at that point of time. As a result, nobody stayed in the said accommodation from morning till evening on working days.

9. When the petitioner and his family members returned home on 25.10.2004, they were shocked to see all their household goods strewn and dumped in heaps along the public road outside their residence. On making enquiries, it was revealed that the petitioner had been evicted from the said house under a Court decree of possession. The petitioner had no knowledge or notice of any litigation between the landlord of the said premises and respondent No.2 herein or of any decree directing eviction from the said property.

10. It is contended on behalf of th