Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, ASHA MENON
CPL Roni Sen – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. video conferencing for hearings. (Para 1) |
| 2. claim for similar reliefs as previous cases. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. respondents agree to dispose of the petition. (Para 4) |
| 4. direction to grant pro rata pension if eligible. (Para 5) |
| 5. interest on arrears and order upload. (Para 6 , 7) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral):
CM APPL. 7982/2021 (Exemption) in W.P. (C) 2695/2021
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the applications stand disposed of.
W.P. (C) 2695/2021
1. These 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 Certificates (NOCs) had been given.
4. Learned counsel for
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.
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 mandates that if the petitioner is similarly placed as in prior judgements, pro-rata pension must be granted, reinforcing the obligation for verification and timely communication regarding ....
Equal treatment under Article 14 mandates that similarly situated individuals must be granted the same entitlements, with a requirement for justification on any discrepancies.
The court affirmed the right to pro rata pension for eligible petitioners, ensuring compliance with equal treatment principles and due verification standards from prior judgments.
The court establishes that pension claims must be assessed based on established precedents ensuring equity and mandated timelines for verification and payment.
A petitioner similarly placed to those in precedent cases may seek pro rata pension, with the court enforcing timely payment and stating penalties for delays.
Equitable treatment mandates that similarly placed individuals receive the same pension benefits, with rights for verification and appeal preserved.
Court directed verification for pro rata pension based on prior judgments, requiring timely compliance and communication of reasons if denied the relief.
The court mandated equal treatment for similarly situated petitioners in pension matters, affirming the provision of arrears based on prior judgments.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
