Delhi High Court
Manoj Kumar Singh vs Union Of India & Ors. on 20 January, 2022
$~55
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 1207/2022
MANOJ KUMAR SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Vivek Sharma, Advocate.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Shashank Bajpai, Senior Panel
Counsel for UOI with Mr. Supragya
Ram Mishra, Advocate.
% Date of Decision: 20th January, 2022
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, J (ORAL)
C.M.No.3539/2022
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) No.1207/2022 & C.M.No.3538/2022
1. The matter has been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. After some arguments, learned counsel for t he Pet itioner does n ot
wish to press prayers (b) as well as (g) of the present writ petition. The
remaining prayers in the writ petition are as under:-
(a) Allow this writ petition, and
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:JASWANT
SINGH RAWAT
Signing Date:22.01.2022
(c) issue writ, order or direction(s) in the nature of mandamus
commanding respondent No.2 to issue Last Pay Certificate (LPC) of
petitioner to respondent No.3 as the same is mandatory requirement of
law and the spirit of judgment of this Hon'ble Court in WP(C)
1034/2017 (Annexure P-9); and
(d) further issue writ of certiorari quashing the recovery demand of
Rs.4,64,541/- raised for the first time vide letter
CF/178203L/MKS/07/IRLA dated 25.09.2017 of respondent No.2
(Annexure P-6) alleging excess payment being paid to th e pet itioner
for a period during 01.01.2006 To 14.02.2017; and
(e) issue writ, order or direction(s) in the nature of mandamus
commanding respondent No.2 to correct the CGHS account of
petitioner as due to wrong deduction of CGHS su bscription du ring
deputation period @ INR 450/- per month amounting to INR 42583/-
as on date (as the same is impermissible during deputation) petitioner
will again be saddled with wrongful recovery on this count on his
reversion to respondent No.2;
(f) issue writ, order or direction(s) in the nature of mandamus
commanding respondent No.2 to credit GPF & PLI su bscription of
petitioner from Feb. 2017 @ INR 5000/- per month & INR 924/- per
month, respectively and update the same till date and further, en sure
the revocation of suspension of PLI Policy by the APS; and
(h) pass any such other and further orders as are deemed fit & proper,
necessary & expedient in facts and circumstances of t h e case an d in
the interest of justice.
3. Keeping in view the diverse reliefs sought in the present writ petition,
this Court directs the Respondent no.2 to treat the present writ pet ition as a
representation of the Petitioner and decide the same by way of reasoned
order in accordance with law, within twelve weeks.
4. With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition along with
pending application stands disposed of. In the event, the Petitioner is
aggrieved by the decision of Respondent No.2, he shall be at libert y t o file
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:JASWANT
SINGH RAWAT
Signing Date:22.01.2022
appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. This Court clarifies t hat it
has not commented on the merit of the controversy. The rights and
contentions of all the parties are left open.
MANMOHAN, J
NAVIN CHAWLA, J
JANUARY 20, 2022
KA
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:JASWANT
SINGH RAWAT
Signing Date:22.01.2022
