Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Babu Lal - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 13621 of 2021
Decided On : 02-12-2021
Important Points
Subject
Administrative Law - Service Benefits
Headnote
(B) Administrative Law - Right to representation - Failure of department to decide the representation amounts to violation of procedural justice. (Para 3)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner served as a Head Constable from CISF for over thirty years and claims incorrect pension fixation against the prescribed grade.
Findings of Court:
Court directed the department to decide the representation within eight weeks.
Issues: Appropriateness of pension fixation and entitlement to second ACP benefits.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the right to a reasoned decision on representations as fundamental to ensure procedural fairness.
Result: Writ petition disposed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. pension fixation and acp benefits violation (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. pending representation requires response (Para 3) |
| 3. decision on representation mandated (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J.: (Oral)--By way of the present petition, Petitioner seeks directions to the Respondents to grant second Assured Career Progression (hereinafter referred to as `ACP') benefit on completion of twenty four years of regular service and to restructure the pension in the requisite and correct grade-pay of Assistant-Sub-Inspector as well as to grant the consequential benefits, including arrears of pension as per the correct rank of Assistant-Sub- Inspector instead of Head-Constable.
2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner retired as a Head Constable from CISF on 30th April, 2005 after serving for thirty years, one month and twenty five days. He states that the Respondents have wrongly fixed the pension of the petitioner in the incorrect grade pay of Head Constable instead of the applicable and correct grade pay of Assistant Sub-Inspector. He states that this is in direct violation of the ACP which categorically grants the benefit of first ACP after regular service of twelve years and second ACP after a regular service of twenty four years.
3. A perusal of the paper-book reveals that the petitioner has submitted a representation through his counsel dated 1st August, 2021 to the respondent- Department. However, the same has not been decided by the Department till date.
4. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to decide the petitioner's representation dated 1st August, 2021 by way of a reasoned order in accordance with law within eight weeks.
