Union Of India & Ors vs Ram Sewak Bhaskar
2009 Latest Caselaw 4756 Del

*                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                           W.P. (C.) No.7655/2008

%                        Date of Decision: 20.11.2009

Union Of India & Ors                                      .... Petitioners

                         Through Mr.Shailendra Tiwary, Advocate.

                                  Versus

Ram Sewak Bhaskar                                        .... Respondent

                         Through Mr.Lalta Prasad.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI

1.     Whether reporters of Local papers may be              Yes
       allowed to see the judgment?
2.     To be referred to the reporter or not?                No
3.     Whether the judgment should be reported in            No
       the Digest?


ANIL KUMAR, J.

*

The petitioner has impugned the order dated 07.05.2007 in OA

No. 1365/2006 titled as Ram Sewak Bhaskar Vs. Union of India and

Others whereby the petitioner was directed to pay the arrears of retiral

benefits to the petitioner on account of proforma promotion/notional

promotion given to the respondent.

Pursuant to the letter dated 16.04.2001 the name of the

respondent was placed in the panel of modified selection of Chief Office

Superintendant in Grade of Rs.7450-11500(RSRP). The respondent

was also given proforma promotion and his pay had been fixed as

detailed in the said communication. By said letter it was also clarified

that no arrears of pay were to be paid to the retired employee pursuant

to the notional promotion granted and because pay fixation had been

done as per Railway Board PS No. 114/2003.

In view of the communication dated 16.4.2007 granting notional

promotion to the respondent, the Central Administrative Tribunal had

disposed of the petition with a direction to pay the retiral benefits on

the basis of notional promotion granted to the respondent. The

Tribunal had directed for payment of arrears of retiral benefits and the

Tribunal had not ordered payment of arrears of pay to the retired

employee.

In the circumstances, there is no fault in the order of the Tribunal

directing payment of arrears of retiral benefits on the basis of proforma

promotion granted to the respondent.

The writ petition is without any merit and therefore, it is

dismissed. Parties are left to bear their own costs.

ANIL KUMAR, J.

NOVEMBER 20, 2009                                  VIPIN SANGHI, J.
'bm'