Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
JUDGMENT
MRS ASHA CHANDRA ..... Petitioner
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Respondents : Mr. Ripu Daman Bharadwaj, CGSC with
Ms. Niyati Sharma, Govt. Pleader for R-1 to
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
1. Petitioner is aggrieved by judgment dated 22.04.2022 whereby the Original Application of the Petitioner has been dismissed holding that the same is barred by limitation as well as lacks merit.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the claim of the Petitioner in the Original Application was for removal of disparity created by the 7th Pay Commission. He submits that a passing reference was made in the Original Application to the 5th Pay 2022:DHC:3305-DB W.P.(C) 12260/2022 2 Commission and the submissions of learned counsel for the Petitioner were misconstrued and the Tribunal formed an opinion that the Petitioner was impugning the recommendations of the 5th Pay Commission. Learned counsel submits that the Petitioner was not impugning the recommendations of the 5th Pay Commission and his grievance was only with regard to the anomaly created by the 7th Pay Commission and was seeking rectification of the anomaly.
3. Issue notice.
4. Notice is accepted by learned counsel appearing for the Respondents.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the Respondents also concedes that the main prayer of the Petitioner was with regard to the 7th Pay Commission. He submits that the relief sought by the Petitioner in the Original Application is not maintainable and he opposes the same. He, however, submits that since the petition was disposed of at the notice stage itself, opportunity of filing counter affidavit was not granted to the Respondents.
6. Perusal of the impugned judgment shows that the Tribunal has formed an opinion that the Original Application is barred by limitation holding that the Petitioner seems to be seeking rectification of the anomaly arising out of the 5th Pay Commission. Ex facie the same appears to be an erroneous finding since Petitioner has not impugned the recommendations of the 5th Pay Commission and her grievance is with regard to an alleged anomaly created by the 7th Pay Commission. W.P.(C) 12260/2022 3
7. In view of the above, impugned order dated 22.04.2022 is set aside. Matter is remitted to the Tribunal to consider the same afresh in accordance with law. It is clarified that this Court has neither considered nor commented upon the contention of either party on merits. All rights and contentions are reserved.
8. Parties shall appear before the Tribunal on 28.09.2022.
9. Petition is disposed of in above terms.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J AUGUST 24, 2022 yg