Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Saurabh Banerjee, JJ.
Daljit Singh Sumbrya - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 11251 of 2022
Decided On : 28-07-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ of mandamus for appointment recognition (Para 1) |
| 2. prevailing judgment supports the petitioner (Para 2) |
| 3. court directs representations based on past judgment (Para 3) |
| 4. petition disposed with directions (Para 4) |
1. Vide the present petition, petitioner seeks issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to reckon date of assumption of charge by petitioner to the post of Assistant Sub Inspector (Clerk) with effect from date of appointment of petitioner to post of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Clerk) and consequently grant one increment on 01.01.2006 in the pre-revised pay scale and thereafter next increment in the revised pay structure on 01.07.2006 in terms of paragraph 3 of office memorandum dated 19.03.2012 and other consequential benefits.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue at hand is covered by a judgment of the coordinate Division Bench of this Court in W.P. (C) No. 4448/2016 titled as `Vijayan V.V. vs. Union of India and others' decided on 01.04.2019.
3. Since the legal issue involved in the present writ petition stands finally settled by the judgment of this Court in W.P. (C) No. 4448/2016, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the present writ petitions pending. Accordingly, this Court directs the respondents to treat the present writ petition filed by the petitioner as representations in accordance with the judgment of this Court in W.P. (C) No. 4448/2016 and decide the same by way of a reasoned order within six weeks.
4. With aforesaid directions, the present petition stand disposed of.
Legal precedent must be followed, and petitions concerning increment calculations can be treated as representations based on prior judicial decisions.
Precedent in legal matters underscores that similar issues must be resolved consistently, reinforcing judicial efficiency and finality in decisions.
The court emphasized the importance of deciding the representations of the petitioner within a specified time frame and reserved the rights and contentions of the parties.
The High Court may issue a direction to statutory authorities to consider and dispose of a pending service-related representation within a stipulated time frame without adjudicating the underlying me....
Entitlement to fixation of pay as per eligibility despite initial promotion without possessing the required qualification.
The court emphasized the necessity for administrative compliance with prior court orders when determining appointment and seniority.
The court emphasized the need for consistent application of benefits under the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, reaffirming entitlements based on prior rulings in similar cases.
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
