Delhi High Court
Surendra Pal Singh vs Union Of India And Ors. on 8 February, 2021
$~Suppl.-18, 20, 22, 28, 30, 40
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
18.
+ W.P. (C) 9905/2019, CM APPL. 4502/2021
SURENDRA PAL SINGH .....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Pallavi Awasthi, Advocate
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr.Vikas Mahajan
(CGSC) with Mr.Aakash Varma Adv.
20.
+ W.P. (C) 2024/2020, CM APPL. 4534/2021
SUBHASH KISAN MESHRAM .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Ruchir Mishra, Advocate
22.
+ W.P. (C) 1531/2021, CM APPL. 4385/2021
AJAY KUMAR .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr.Sheshank Bajpai,
Advocate for
UOI.
W.P. (C) 9905/2019 & connected matters Page 1 of 5
28
+ W.P. (C) 1595/2021, CM APPL. 4532/2021
THOMAS MARAMVELIL SARAMMA & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Ms. Pallavi Awasthi, Advocate
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr.Vikas Mahajan
(CGSC) with Mr.Aakash Varma Adv.
30.
+ W.P. (C) 1605/2021, CM APPL. 4587/2021
AMIT KUMAR CHOUDHARY & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Ms. Pallavi Awasthi, Advocate
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Ms.Nidhi Raman, CGSC
with Ms.Dacchita Shahi, Advocate.
40.
+ W.P. (C) 1256/2020, CM APPL. 32936/2020
MARUTI RATHOD .....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Pallavi Awasthi, Advocate
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr.Harish Vaidyanathan, Shankar,
CGSC with. Ms.Kinjal Shrivastava
and Mr.Varun Kishore, Advocates.
% Date of Decision: 8th February, 2021
W.P. (C) 9905/2019 & connected matters Page 2 of 5
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ASHA MENON
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, J (Oral):
22. CM APPL. 4385/2021 (Exemption) in W.P. (C) 1531/2021
28. CM APPL. 4532/2021 (Exemption) in W.P. (C) 1595/2021
30. CM APPL. 4587/2021 (Exemption) in W.P. (C) 1605/2021
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the applications stand disposed of.
18. CM APPL. 4502/2021 (Early hearing) in W.P. (C) 9905/2019
20. CM APPL. 4534/2021 (Early hearing) in W.P. (C) 2024/2020
Keeping in view the averments made in the applications, the same are
allowed and the petitions are taken up for hearing today.
Accordingly, the applications stand disposed of.
W.P. (C) 9905/2019
W.P. (C) 2024/2020
W.P. (C) 1531/2021
W.P. (C) 1595/2021
W.P. (C) 1605/2021
W.P. (C) 1256/2020
1. These petitions have been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners state that the petitioners in these petitions
claim to be similarly placed to the petitioners in Brijlal Kumar v. Union of India
and others connected petitions 2020 SCC OnLine Del 1477 and the petitioners
in Govind Kumar Srivastava v. Union of India 2019 SCC OnLine Del 6425
(DB) [against which Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 8813/2019 has been
dismissed on 26th April, 2019] and seeks the same relief as claimed therein i.e. of
pro rata pension.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on enquiry, state that the requisite No
Objection Certificates (NOCs) had been given.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly state that subject to the right to
verification and the right of appeal to the Supreme Court against the judgment in
Brijlal Kumar (supra) being saved, the petition be disposed of.
5. Accordingly, the petitions are disposed of directing the respondents Indian
Air Force that within twelve weeks herefrom, if they find the petitioners to be
similarly placed as the petitioners in Govind Kumar Srivastava (supra) and
Brijlal Kumar (supra) and other connected petitions supra, to grant him the same
relief as granted in those petitions i.e. by payment of arrears of pro rata pension
from the date of discharge till the date of payment and in future to continue to pay
pro rata pension to the petitioner. However, if on verification it is found that the
petitioners, for any reason, are not entitled to pro rata pension for reasons other
than those stated in the judgments in Govind Kumar Srivastava (supra) and
Brijlal Kumar (supra) and other connected petitions supra being in personam, the
respondents, within the said twelve weeks, shall communicate to the petitioner(s),
not so found entitled, the reasons in writing thereof and in which event, the
petitioner(s) shall be entitled to take further remedies there against. Needless to
state that if any documents are asked for by the respondents, the same shall be
furnished by the petitioner(s) within a week.
6. If the arrears of pro rata pension are not paid within twelve weeks, the same
shall also incur interest thereon @ 7% per annum from the expiry of twelve
weeks till the date of payment.
7. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. Copy of the order be also
forwarded to the learned counsel through e-mail.
MANMOHAN, J
ASHA MENON, J
FEBRUARY 08, 2021
pkb
