Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Del) 2984

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, Manoj Jain, JJ.
Subodh Kumar (Ex Cpl-786978-R) – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
W.P. (C) 9868 of 2023 & CM. Appl. 37954 of 2023
Decided On : 27-07-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Pallavi Awasthi, Advocate, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Manish Kumar, Senior Panel Counsel with Mr. Ravindra Vikram, Advocate, for the Respondent.

Grant of pro-rata pension based on similarity to other connected petitions and specific provisions for verification, communication of reasons, and payment of interest on arrears.

Headnote:
Pension - Pro-rata Pension - Grant of pro-rata pension to petitioner - Judgment of coordinate Bench relied upon - Petition disposed directing Indian Air Force to grant pro-rata pension if petitioner found similarly placed as in other connected petitions
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought grant of pro-rata pension from the date of his discharge with all consequential benefits, relying on a judgment of a coordinate Bench of the Court.
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 other connected petitions, with the payment of arrears of pro-rata pension and continuation of future pro-rata pension payments. Interest would be incurred if arrears were not paid within twelve weeks.
Issues: Grant of pro-rata pension, verification of petitioner's entitlement, communication of reasons if not entitled, furnishing of documents, and payment of interest on arrears.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the judgment of a coordinate Bench and directed the Indian Air Force to grant pro-rata pension to the petitioner if found similarly placed as in other connected petitions, with specific provisions for verification, communication of reasons, and payment of interest on arrears.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the Indian Air Force was directed to grant pro-rata pension to the petitioner if found similarly placed as in other connected petitions, with specific provisions for arrears payment, continuation of future payments, communication of reasons if not entitled, furnishing of documents, and payment of interest on arrears.

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (Oral)

1. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. With the consent of the parties, petition is taken up for final disposal today itself.

3. Petitioner seeks grant of pro-rata pension from the date of his discharge with all consequential benefits. Learned counsel for petitioner relies on judgment of a coordinate Bench of this Court dated 08.02.2021 in W.P. (C) 9905/2019, titled Surendra Pal Singh Vs. Union of India and Ors.. From the said judgment it is clear that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the factual as well as legal matrix of Surendra Pal Singh (supra).

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner in this petition claim to be similarly placed to the petitioners in Brijlal Kumar v. Union of India and others connected petitions 2020 SCC OnLine Del 1477 and the petitioners in Govind Kumar Srivastava v. Union of India, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 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.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on enquiry, states that the requisite No Objection Certificates (NOCs) had been given.

6. 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.

7. 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. Needless to state that if any documents are asked for by the respondents, the same shall be furnished by the petitioner within a week.

8. 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.

9. Petition is allowed in the above terms.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document