Delhi High Court
Narendra Singh vs Uoi And Ors on 3 March, 2016
Author: Hima Kohli
$~2.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 462/2016
NARENDRA SINGH ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Mohammad Ali, Advocate
versus
UOI AND ORS .... Respondents
Through: Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, CGSC with
Mr. T.P. Singh, Advocate and Mr. S.S. Sejwal,
Law Officer, CRPF.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
% 03.03.2016
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner, who is working
in the CRPF, praying inter alia for issuing directions to the respondents to
grant him the benefit under the ACP Scheme, on completion of 24 years of
regular service.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the issue raised in the
present petition stands settled vide judgment dated 05.03.2015 passed by the
Division Bench in a batch of writ petitions, lead matter registered as
W.P.(C) 388/2015 entitled Om Prakash and Ors. Vs. UOI and Ors.,
whereunder directions were issued to the respondents to grant the petitioners
therein the second ACP benefits with effect from the date, they had
completed 24 years of service, reckoned from the date of their initial
appointment, subject to their being found fit for promotion and subject to
other eligibility conditions.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that after the judgment
dated 05.03.2015 was pronounced, the respondents had filed review
petitions seeking review of the said decision, which were dismissed by a
common order dated 29.01.2016, by holding that re-mustering of the
petitioners therein to the rank of Naik RO had to be ignored for grant of
ACP. It is stated by counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner herein is
entitled to the identical relief as he has completed 24 years of service, from
the date of his initial appointment.
4. That the legal position stands settled vide judgment dated 05.03.2015
in the captioned cases, is not disputed by the respondents though learned
counsel for the respondents adds that they are contemplating filing SLPs
against the said judgment.
5. Having regard to the fact that as on date, the aforesaid decision will
govern the petitioner in the present case as well, the present petition is
disposed of on the same lines as the captioned petitions with directions
issued to the respondents to grant second ACP benefits to the petitioner with
effect from the date he had completed 24 years of service, reckoned from the
date of his initial appointment. Further, while considering the case of the
petitioner, the respondents are directed to ignore re-mustering of the
petitioner to the rank of Naik RO, for grant of ACP.
6. The respondents are directed to take a decision and convey the same
to the petitioner within ten weeks from today. If the petitioner is found
eligible for being promoted and resultantly, entitled to grant of the second
ACP benefits, the same shall be extended to him within the same timeline
and the arrears would be paid within six weeks from the date of the decision.
In case the arrears are not paid within the stipulated timeline, then the same
shall carry simple interest @ 8% per annum.
7. The petition is disposed of.
HIMA KOHLI, J
SUNIL GAUR, J
MARCH 03, 2016
rkb
