Santosh Kumar (SM GD) vs Union of India

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Saurabh Banerjee, JJ.
Santosh Kumar (SM GD) - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 2870 of 2022
Decided On : 12-10-2022

Important Points

The court directed timely administrative action regarding pending reliefs while recognizing satisfaction of requests for some petitioners.

Subject

Administrative Law - Pension Claims

Headnote

(A) Constitution of India - Principles of natural justice - Right to pension - The petitioners sought to be treated under the old pension scheme and requested for re-fixing seniority. Relief for petitioners 1, 3, and 4 was satisfied while the issue for petitioner 2 is pending - The court directed a decision on the pending relief within four weeks and emphasized communication with the petitioner. (Paras 1-3)

(B) Administrative Law - The obligation of the authority to act in a timely manner and to ensure an opportunity for redress.

Findings of Court:
Respondents are directed to address petitioner 2's relief within a stipulated time.

Issues: Whether the relief sought has been satisfied for all petitioners and the timeline for the decision on pending requests.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for a timely resolution of administrative requests while noting procedural fairness.

Result: The petition is disposed of.

Table of Content
1. reliefs sought by petitioners regarding pension and seniority. (Para 1)
2. court directs final decision on pending relief within four weeks. (Para 2)
3. petitioner no.2 can challenge decisions if aggrieved. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that reliefs sought by the petitioners qua prayer clause (i) for treating the petitioner under the old pension scheme which was applicable till 31.12.2003 at par with their batchmate IRLA No. 12045 AC/GD Mrityunjay Kumar and qua prayer clause (ii) for directing the respondent no.2 to re-fix the seniority of the petitioner in the rank of assistant commandant at par with their batch-mate IRLA No. 12045 AC/GD Mrityunjay Kumar alongwith the consequential benefits qua petitioner nos.1, 3 & 4 have already been satisfied. However, the said reliefs are pending consideration in respect of the petitioner no.2.

2. Accordingly, we hereby dispose of the present petition directing the respondents to take final decision in respect of reliefs sought by petitioner no.2 within four weeks from today. Decision thereof, shall be communicated to the petitioner no.2 within one week thereafter.

3. Needless to state that if the petitioner no.2 is still aggrieved by the decision, he may challenge the same before the appropriate forum.