SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Asha Menon, JJ.
Rakesh Chandra (ASI GD) - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P. (C) 2031 of 2021, CM Appl. 5946 of 2021
Decided On : 16-02-2021




Judicial respect for prior rulings guides the grant of financial benefits under government schemes, reinforcing adherence to established judicial precedent and timely action on petitions.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Request for mandamus for second financial upgradation under MACP Scheme - Petitioner seeks to be granted benefit from 01st January, 2006, accounting for service up to voluntary retirement - Cited decisions include Union of India vs. Balbir Singh Turn & Anr., Civil Appeal Diary No.3744/2016, and Sunil Kumar Tyagi vs. Union of India & Anr. - No stay issued by Supreme Court on similar matters. (Paras 4, 5, 6)

(B) Judicial Precedent - Principles of judicial discipline and respect for past decisions reflected in the High Court’s directions mirroring previous rulings. (Para 5)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought financial benefits under MACP based on Supreme Court and High Court precedents. No interim stay was ordered by the Supreme Court in related appeals of Union of India.

Findings of Court:
The writ petition is disposed with orders consistent with prior judgments, directing consideration and positive response within twelve weeks.

Issues: Determining entitlement for financial upgradation under MACP Scheme and aligning with judicial precedents.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized adherence to previous rulings and affirmed the necessity of a timely response to the petitioner’s representation.

Result: Writ petition disposed of with directions.

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J. (Oral)--Present petition has been filed seeking a number of prayers. However, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that a similar order as passed by a Division Bench in W.P.(C) No.6437/2019 dated 30th May, 2019 be passed in the present writ petition. He clarifies that neither the judgment and order dated 30th May, 2019 in W.P.(C) No.6437/2019 nor the judgments referred to in the said order have been challenged before the Supreme Court by the respondents.

2. Issue notice.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents accept notice. Learned counsel for the respondents states that in similar matters, notices have been issued by the Supreme Court in the condonation of delay and special leave petitions. He, however, candidly states that there is no stay in the said special leave petitions.

4. It is pertinent to mention that the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition to primarily seek a mandamus to the respondents to grant the benefit of the second financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme in the Pay Band of Rs.9300-34800 with Grade Pay of Rs.4200 w.e.f. 01st January, 2006 and wherever 20 years have been completed, till the date the petitioner voluntarily retired on 30th June, 2006 or the dates mentioned in the prayer clause along with consequential benefits including arrears. The petitioner's claim is based upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and Ors. Vs. Balbir Singh Turn & Anr., Civil Appeal Diary No.3744/2016 along with other cases decided on 08th December, 2017. The petitioner also places reliance on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Sunil Kumar Tyagi vs. Union of India & Anr., W.P. (C) No.3549/2018 decided on 01st May, 2019.

5. As admittedly there is no interim order passed by the Supreme Court in any of the special leave petitions filed by the Union of India in similar matters, we dispose of the present writ petition in similar terms as passed in W.P.(C) No.6437/2019 i.e. a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim in the light of the judgments in Union of India and Ors. Vs. Balbir Singh Turn & Anr. (supra) and Sunil Kumar Tyagi vs. Union of India & Anr. (supra) as well as Union of India & Ors. vs. M.V. Mohanan Nair, (2020) 5 SCC 421 and to dispose of the representation of the petitioner positively within twelve weeks from today. It is clarified that in the event the Supreme Court varies or set asides the order passed by the Division Bench in Sunil Kumar Tyagi vs. Union of India & Anr. (supra) and/or any other similar matter, then the present order shall abide by the order(s) of the Apex Court.

6. With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition along with pending application stands disposed of.

7. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. Copy of the order be also forwarded to the learned counsel through e-mail.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top