Delhi High Court
Parmanand Jha vs Union Of India And Ors. on 25 January, 2021
$~Suppl.-32 to 34 & 39
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
32
+ W.P.(C) 1432/2020
KARAN SINGH RATHORE ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Manoj Kumar Gupta with
Mr.Banvendra Singh Gandhi,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: None.
33
+ W.P.(C) 2360/2020
BINIT KUMAR PATHAK ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Manoj Kumar Gupta with
Mr.Banvendra Singh Gandhi,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Mr.Tusar Rao with Mr.Jitendra
Kumar Tripathi, Advocates.
34
+ W.P.(C) 2673/2020
PARMANAND JHA ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Manoj Kumar Gupta with
Mr.Banvendra Singh Gandhi,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Mr.Tanveer Ahmed Ansari,
Advocate.
W.P. (C) 1432/2020 & Connected matters Page 1 of 4
39
+ W.P.(C) 932/2021 & CM APPL. 2542/2021
JAI PRAKASH SHUKLA ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Manoj Kumar Gupta with
Mr.Banvendra Singh Gandhi,
Advocates.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Ms.Amrita Prakash, CGSC with
Mr.Hari Shankar Sharma, Advocates.
% Date of Decision: 25th January, 2021
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ASHA MENON
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, J (Oral):
C.M.No.2586/2021 in W.P.(C) No.1432/2020
C.M.No.2579/2021 in W.P.(C) No.2360/2020
C.M.No.2587/2021 in W.P.(C) No.2673/2020
W.P.(C) No.932/2021 & C.M.No.2542/2021
Keeping in view the averments in the applications, early hearing is
allowed and with consent of parties, the matters are taken up for hearing
today.
Accordingly, the applications stand disposed of.
W.P.(C) No.1432/2020
W.P.(C) No.2360/2020
W.P.(C) No.2673/2020
W.P.(C) No.932/2021
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners in this
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.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on enquiry, states that the
requisite No Objection Certificated (NOC) had been given.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly states 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.
4. 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
petitioners, not so found entitled, the reasons in writing thereof and in which
event, the petitioners shall be entitled to take further remedies there against.
5. 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.
MANMOHAN, J
ASHA MENON, J
JANUARY 25, 2021
KA
