M. Srinivasu Raju & Anr. vs Union Of India & Ors.
2021 Latest Caselaw 870 Del

                          $~Suppl.-15
                          *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                          +       W.P. (C) 3223/2021

                                  M. SRINIVASU RAJU & ANR.                 .....Petitioners
                                                Through: Mr. Vaibhav Kumar, Advocate for
                                                         Ms. Pallavi Awasthi, Advocate.

                                                     Versus

                                  UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                            .....Respondents
                                                Through:          Ms. Amrita Prakash, CGSC with Mr.
                                                                  Hari Shankar Sharma, Advocate and
                                                                  Mr. Vinny Shangloo, Advocate.

                          %                                         Date of Decision: 15th March, 2021


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

                                                     JUDGMENT

MANMOHAN, J (Oral):

CM APPL. 9807/2021 (Exemption) in W.P. (C) 3223/2021 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. W.P. (C) 3223/2021

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners states 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

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:MANJEET KAUR Signing Date:18.03.2021 18:29:30 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 Certificates (NOCs) 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 petition is 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 petitioners. 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. Needless to state that if any documents are asked for by the respondents, the same shall be furnished by the petitioners within a week.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:MANJEET KAUR Signing Date:18.03.2021 18:29:30

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 MARCH 15, 2021 pkb

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:MANJEET KAUR Signing Date:18.03.2021 18:29:30