Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Debendra Kumar Dash - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 12102 of 2021 & CM Appl. 37815 of 2021
Decided On : 27-10-2021
Important Points
Subject
Administrative Law - Pensions and Retirement Benefits
Headnote
(B) Administrative Procedure - The court mandated that if the petitioner is similarly situated to previous petitioners, he should receive equivalent relief, or be provided with written reasons if not. (Paras 4-5)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner alleges entitlement to pro rata pension similar to that established in prior cases, having provided necessary NOCs.
Findings of Court:
The court ordered the Indian Air Force to process the petitioner's claim within twelve weeks or provide written justifications if denied.
Issues: The main issues were the criteria for granting pro rata pension and the administrative processes involved.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that relief should align with prior judgments if the petitioner was similarly situated, establishing a procedural framework for pension claims.
Result: Petition disposed of with directives to the respondents.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claim for pro rata pension similarity. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. respondent's acknowledgment of petition disposal. (Para 3) |
| 3. conditions for granting pro rata pension. (Para 4) |
| 4. interest on unpaid pro rata pension due. (Para 5) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)--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 2020 SCC OnLine Del 1477 and the petitioner 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.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on enquiry, states that the requisite No Objection Certificates (NOCs) had been given.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly states that subject to right to verification and 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 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, 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 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 within a week.
5. 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.
