SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Mahender Singh Negi, Ex CPL 799195-R - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 1265 of 2022
Decided On : 21-01-2022




The court establishes that pension claims must be assessed based on established precedents ensuring equity and mandated timelines for verification and payment.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 14 - Pro rata pension - The petitioner claims similar treatment to prior petitioners in the context of pension entitlement - Relief directed to be granted to petitioner if deemed similarly placed - Time frame of twelve weeks established for verification and payment instructions to be communicated - Interest on delayed payment specified at 7% per annum. (Paras 1, 4, and 5)

(B) Administrative Law - The right to appeal is preserved - Respondents required to provide written reasons if eligibility is denied based on verification findings. (Paras 4.)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner asserts eligibility for pro rata pension akin to prior cases and confirms the provision of requisite NOCs. The court is directing the Indian Air Force to verify and ensure equivalent relief or provide written reasoning for denial.

Findings of Court:
The court mandates verification of the petitioner's position relative to similar prior cases within twelve weeks, granting pension if eligibility is confirmed, with interest provisions for delayed payment highlighted.

Issues: Central issues include the criterion for eligibility for pro rata pension based on similar cases and the procedural requirements for verification and payment.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized a comparative evaluation of the petitioner's circumstances against those in the precedent cases, reaffirming administrative fairness and prescribed timelines for compliance with its order.

Result: Petition disposed of as directed.

Table of Content
1. claim for pro rata pension similarity (Para 1 , 2)
2. right to appeal mentioned (Para 3)
3. respondents' obligation to grant relief (Para 4 , 5)

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J. (Oral)

The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.

CM APPL. 3714/2022 (Exemption)

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 1265/2022

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner 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 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 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 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 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.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top