Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 29.11.2022
ASIF RAZA KHAN ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Charan Singh & Mr. Ranjeet Singh, Advocates
Through: Mr.Gigi C. George, Mr. Dheeraj Singh & Mr. Anshuman Deka, Advocates with Constable Sandeep
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
JUDGMENT
1. The present petition has been preferred by the petitioner, son of a HC/GD in CISF, who had served for a continuous period of 26 years till his death in service on 22.04.2007 after suffering a stroke. The petitioner claims to have attained 25 years of age on 15.09.2012 and his pension was stopped by the bank. The petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents for redemption of his pension as he claims to be suffering 55% disability and not capable of earning a livelihood.
2. Petitioner claims to have filed various representations to the competent authority, however, no action has been taken by the respondents. Hence, this petition.
3. Pleadings are complete. 11:03 Neutral Citation Number: 2022/DHC/005227 W.P.(C) 932/2020
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents submits that in Para-2 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, it has been averred that the present petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has not disclosed that he was 55% disabled at the time of submission of family papers. Our attention has been drawn to Handicapped Certificate issued by the Office of the Civil Surgeon cum C.M.O. Kaimur, Bhabua (Annexure-6) filed along with the counter affidavit in support of above submission.
5. Pertinently, by way of present petition, petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents for redemption of his pension on the pretext that he is 55% disabled, which according to respondents was not brought to their knowledge.
6. In view of the above, we hereby dispose of the present petition with direction to the respondents to consider the present petition as a representation on behalf of the petitioner and to take a final call on it in the light of Annexure-6 attached to their counter affidavit, within four weeks. The decision so taken be communicated to the petitioner within one week thereafter.
7. Needless to say, if any grievance still persists, the petitioner is at library to have recourse to law before the appropriate Forum.
(SURESH KUMAR KAIT) JUDGE (NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA)
JUDGE NOVEMBER 29, 2022 11:03