Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
VIBHU BAKHRU, AMIT MAHAJAN
Satya Dev Prajapati – Appellant
Versus
Delhi High Court – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge of the memorandum on pension scheme cut-off (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. details of petitioners' recruitment timelines (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. details regarding representations and rejection (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. petitioners' arguments on prior decisions (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. court's reasoning on terms of employment (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 6. previous court decisions considered (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 7. identification of precedents affecting claims (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 8. distinguishing relevant cases affecting decision (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 9. discussion on the office memorandum implications (Para 50 , 52) |
| 10. final dismissal of petitions (Para 53) |
JUDGMENT
Vibhu Bakhru, J.
1. The petitioners have filed these petitions, inter alia, impugning an Office Memorandum dated 17.02.2020 (hereafter referred to as `the impugned OM'), whereby the coverage under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 (hereafter `the Old Pension Scheme') was confined to only those candidates who were recruited against vacancies arising on or before 31.12.2003 and the selection results were declared on or before 01.01.2004. All other employees appointed after the cut-off date, including the petitioner
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
