Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Yogesh Kumar Saxena - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 266 of 2022 & CM Appl. 785 of 2022
Decided On : 07-01-2022
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)--The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the matter in issue is covered by judgment of this Court in Mahendra Singh & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors., WP(C) 9094/2019.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents appearing on advance notice states that the respondents will treat this writ petition itself as a representation made by each of the petitioners to the respondents for extending the benefit of the judgment passed by this Court on 4th February 2019 in WP(C) 7577 of 2016 (SI GD Vinod Kumar v. Union of India and Ors.).
4. The Court notes that the petitioners herein are identically situated as SI GD Vinod Kumar and there is no reason as to why the respondents should deny to these petitioners the same relief that has been granted by this Court to SI GD Vinod Kumar.
5. Accordingly, it is directed that the respondents will now treat the present writ petition as the Petitioners' representations and extend to them the same relief as granted by this Court in the case of SI GD Vinod Kumar (supra).
6. The respondents will pass the necessary orders not later than six weeks from today.
7. The petition is disposed of in view of the above.
Equal treatment under the law requires that similarly situated individuals receive consistent legal benefits and remedies.
The main legal point established is the court's power to issue a mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim for financial upgradation based on relevant court judgments.
The main legal point established is the court's power to issue a mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim in line with specific judgments.
Judicial mandates require adherence to established precedents in administrative claims, emphasizing timely consideration of petitions based on past rulings.
The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim for financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme, referencing established precedents, due to absence of interim stays in similar c....
The court directs respondents to process the petitioner's claim for financial upgradation based on existing legal precedents, emphasizing adherence to prior judgments without interim Supreme Court or....
The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of relevant judgments and the absence of a stay in the Special Leave Petitions filed by the Union of India.
Precedents set by the Supreme Court and High Court regarding financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme must be adhered to, especially in the absence of any stay orders.
Court directed responsive action on financial upgradation under MACP Scheme as specified in prior judgments, reinforcing adherence to established legal precedents.
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
