Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, NAVIN CHAWLA
Rajneesh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners seek relief of pro rata pension. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. respondents acknowledge appeal rights. (Para 3) |
| 3. order for granting pro rata pension. (Para 4) |
| 4. interest applicable for unpaid arrears. (Para 5) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)--Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners in this petition 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.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on enquiry, states that the requisite No Objection Certificate (NOC) had been given.
3. 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.
4. Accordingly, the petition along with pending application is disposed of directing the respondents-
The court mandates that individuals similarly placed as in prior judgments must receive identical pension relief, subject to verification by the relevant authority.
Eligibility for pro rata pension must be verified by the respondents based on previous judgments, with mandated communication of reasons if not granted.
The court mandates the verification of petitioners' eligibility for pro rata pension linked to prior cases, ensuring timely communication of denials and the obligation to pay interest on delays.
The court ruled that similar cases should receive equivalent relief in pension matters, ensuring equitable treatment in the absence of disqualifying factors.
The court underscored that similar cases dictate entitlement to pro rata pension, necessitating verification by the relevant authority within a specified timeframe.
Petitioners similarly situated to previous claimants are entitled to pro rata pension, with interest on delayed payments, and must be informed in writing if found otherwise.
Entitlement to pro rata pension is affirmed if eligibility is established, with a directive for timely payment and interest for delays.
Eligibility for pro rata pension must align with precedents if similarly placed; due process requires verification and may include appeal rights.
Entitlement to pension must be verified against precedent judgments, with interest on arrears if payment is delayed beyond stipulated time.
The court upheld the entitlement of the petitioner to pro rata pension if found similarly placed to certain earlier petitioners, establishing the principle of equal treatment under law regarding pens....
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
