IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Asha Menon, JJ.
R. Raja Rathinam - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P. (C) 1498 of 2021, CM Appl. 4301 of 2021
Decided On : 08-03-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. hearing procedures and exemption from appearance. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. claims regarding pro rata pension based on previous judgments. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. directive to grant pension if similarly placed, with conditions. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. order for communication and document submission. (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral):
1. The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.
CM APPL. 4301/2021
2. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
WP (C) No. 1498/2021
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner in this petition claims to be similarly placed to the petitioner 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.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner in this petition, on enquiry, states that the requisite No Objection Certificate (NOC) had been given.
5. 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.
6. 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(s) within a week.
7. 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.
8. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. Copy of the order be also forwarded to the learned counsel through e-mail.
Entitlement to pro rata pension is extended to similarly situated individuals, with mandatory verification of eligibility prior to payment and provision of interest on delayed payments.
Court mandates uniform treatment in pension claims based on prior judgments, ensuring timely payment and interest on delays.
The court establishes that pension claims must be assessed based on established precedents ensuring equity and mandated timelines for verification and payment.
An individual claiming entitlement to pro rata pension must be evaluated based on the same criteria as established in analogous previous cases, with timely payment mandated.
Equitable treatment mandates that similarly placed individuals receive the same pension benefits, with rights for verification and appeal preserved.
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 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 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 ....
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 entitlement to pro rata pension, verification of entitlement, communication of reasons for non-entitlement, and the consequences of non-payment of arrears with interest.
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.