Santosh Kumar vs Union Of India And Ors.
2021 Latest Caselaw 482 Del

$~Suppl.-21
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+       W.P. (C) 2887/2020, CM APPL. 4925/2021
        SANTOSH KUMAR                                     .....Petitioner
                    Through:            Ms. Pallavi Awasthi, Advocate
                           Versus
        UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.                  .....Respondents
                      Through:  Mr. Monika Arora, Advocate
                                withMr. Shriram Tiwary, Advocate.


%                                       Date of Decision: 12th February, 2021

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ASHA MENON
                     JUDGMENT

MANMOHAN, J (Oral):

CM APPL. 10035/2021 (Exemption) in W.P. (C) 2887/2020

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, applications stand disposed of.

CM APPL. 4925/2021 (Early hearing) in W.P. (C) 2887/2020

Keeping in view the averments made in the application, the same is allowed and the petition is taken up for hearing today.

Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.

W.P. (C) 2887/2020

1. The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner state that the petitioner in this petition claims to be similarly placed to the petitioner in Brijlal Kumar v. Union of India and others connected petitions 2020 SCC OnLine Del 1477 and the petitioner 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 petitioner, 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 petition is disposed of directing the respondents/ Indian Air Force that within twelve weeks herefrom, if they find the petitioner 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 petitioner, 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, not so found entitled, the reasons in writing thereof and in which event, the petitioner 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 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