Uoi & Ors. vs Satish Kumar
2011 Latest Caselaw 1683 Del

*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+           W.P.(C) No. 12800-12802/2005

%                               Date of Decision: 23.03.2011

UOI & ORS.                                          ..... Petitioners
                         Through :   None

                    versus

SATISH KUMAR                                            ..... Respondent
                         Through :   None


CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL

1.    Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed
      to see the judgment ? No
2.    To be referred to the Reporter or not? No
3.    Whether the judgment should be reported in Digest?                No

ANIL KUMAR, J.

No one is present on behalf of the petitioners.

The petitioners have challenged the order dated 25.11.2004 of

the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench granting the

relief to the respondent in terms of OM dated 01.03.2004 stipulating

that in case of pensioners retiring between 01.04.2004 to 31.01.2005

retiral benefits such as fixation of pension, commutation of pension

and DCRG, etc. be paid along with 12% interest for the delay, if any.

The respondent has superannuated on 31.03.2004 in place of

01.04.2004 as contemplated in OM dated 01.03.2004. The Tribunal

has relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in S. Banerjee v

Union of India; AIR 1990 SC 295. It has been held that

considering the facts and circumstances, the respondent is deemed

to have retired on 01.04.2004 and special dispensation as mentioned

in Para 3 of the said OM would apply to him.

Since no one is present on behalf of the parties, the writ

petition is dismissed in default. The interim order dated 18.09.2008

in CM No. 9595/2005 is vacated.

ANIL KUMAR, J.

VEENA BIRBAL, J.

MARCH 23, 2011 kks