IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Asha Menon, JJ.
Binit Kumar - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P. (C) 8341 of 2019
Decided On : 27-01-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. hearing conducted via video conferencing. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner seeks pro rata pension similar to previous cases. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. respondents directed to verify and grant pension within stipulated time. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. order to be uploaded and communicated promptly. (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)
CM APPL.2709/2021
Keeping in view the averments in the application, early hearing is allowed and with consent of parties, the matter is taken up for hearing today.
Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
W.P. (C) 8341/2019
1. 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 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.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on enquiry, states that the requisite No Objection Certificate (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 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, 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 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 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.
Entitlement to pro rata pension is upheld, subject to verification of eligibility, with mandatory interest on delayed payments specified.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the grant of pro rata pension to the petitioner based on similarity to other petitioners in related cases.
The court affirmed the right to equality under Article 14, directing that a petitioner similarly situated to prior cases be granted pro rata pension, ensuring fair administrative practice in verifica....
The court determines the eligibility for pro rata pensions based on prior judgments and mandates verification of petitioners' claims, ensuring equitable treatment.
Court mandates compliance with precedents granting pro rata pensions, requiring verification of petitioners' eligibility and stipulating interest on delayed payments.
The court affirmed the right to pro rata pension for similarly situated individuals, emphasizing the requirement of verification and timely payment of entitlements.
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 court directed the payment of pro rata pension to the petitioner if found similarly situated as in prior decisions, establishing the principle of equality and fair treatment under law.
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.