IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Asha Menon, JJ.
Yashwant Kumar Pathak - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P. (C) 2358 of 2020, W.P. (C) 2457 of 2020 and W.P. (C) 2871 of 2020
Decided On : 22-01-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners claim pro rata pension similar to prior cases. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. respondents agree to dispose of petitions subject to verification. (Para 4) |
| 3. judgment grants pro rata pension with conditions; interest on delay. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. order to be uploaded and communicated. (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)
C.M.No.2417/2021 in W.P.(C) No.2358/2020
C.M.No.2426/2021 in W.P.(C) No.2457/2020
C.M.No.2422/2021 in W.P.(C) No.2871/2020
Keeping in view the averments in the applications, early hearing is allowed and with consent of parties, the matters are taken up for hearing today.
Accordingly, the applications stand disposed of.
W.P.(C) No.2358/2020
W.P.(C) No.2457/2020
W.P.(C) No.2871/2020
1. The petitions have been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that 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 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 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 (NOC) had been given.
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 petitions be disposed of.
5. Accordingly, the petitions are disposed of directing the respondents Indian Air Force that within twelve weeks herefrom, if they find the petitioners to be similarly placed as the petitioners in Govind Kumar Srivastava (supra) and Brijlal Kumar (supra) and other connected petitions supra, to grant them 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 petitioners. However, if on verification it is found that the petitioners, for any reason, are 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 petitioners, not so found entitled, the reasons in writing thereof and in which event, the petitioners 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 determines the eligibility for pro rata pensions based on prior judgments and mandates verification of petitioners' claims, ensuring equitable treatment.
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.
Court mandates compliance with precedents granting pro rata pensions, requiring verification of petitioners' eligibility and stipulating interest on delayed payments.
The court affirmed the entitlement to pro rata pension based on equality principles, mandating timely verification by the Indian Air Force.
Equal treatment in pension matters for similarly situated individuals, establishing entitlement to pro rata pension based on previous case law.
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of the petitioners to pro rata pension in line with previous judgments.
Petitioners similarly placed to others are entitled to pro rata pension; respondents must verify and respond accordingly.
The court affirmed the right to equal treatment under Article 14 for pension entitlements, directing payment of arrears if petitioners are similarly situated to prior beneficiaries.
Court mandated equal treatment for similarly situated individuals regarding pension entitlements, affirming verification rights and specifying interest on delayed payments.
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.