Navin Kumar Sharma v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi High Court · 03 Sep 2021 · 2021:DHC:2729-DB
Manmohan; Navin Chawla
W.P.(C) 9499/2021
2021:DHC:2729-DB
administrative petition_allowed Significant

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court directed grant of pro rata pension to the petitioner if similarly placed as in precedent cases, subject to verification and payment of arrears with interest.

Full Text
Translation output
W.P.(C) 9499/2021
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 03.09.2021
W.P.(C) 9499/2021 & CM 29461/2021
NAVIN KUMAR SHARMA ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Banvendra Singh,Adv.
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms.Anju Gupta,Adv. for UOI.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA MANMOHAN,J. (Oral)
JUDGMENT

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner in this petition claims to be similarly placed to thepetitioner in Brijlal Kumar v. Union of India and others 2020 SCC OnLine Del 1477 and the petitioner 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 petitioner,on enquiry, states that the requisite No Objection Certificates(NOCs) had been given.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly states that subject to right to verification and right of appeal to the SupremeCourt against the judgment in Brijlal Kumar (supra) being saved, the petition be disposed of. 2021:DHC:2729-DB W.P.(C) 9499/2021

4. Accordingly, the petition and the application standdisposed of directing the respondents Indian Air Force that within twelve weeks herefrom, if they find the petitioner to be similarly placed as the petitioner in Govind Kumar Srivastava (supra) and Brijlal Kumar (supra) and other connected petitionsto grant him the same relief as grantedin those petitionsi.e. by payment of arrears of pro rata pension from the dateof discharge tillthe date of payment and in future to continue to pay pro rata pension to the petitioner. However, if on verification it is found that thepetitioner,for any reason, is not entitled to pro rata pension for reasonsother than those stated in thejudgments in Govind Kumar Srivastava (supra) andBrijlal Kumar (supra) and other connectedpetitions being in personam,the respondents, within the said twelve weeks, shall communicate to the petitioner, not so found entitled,the reasons in writing thereof and in which event, the petitioner shall be entitled to take further remedies there against. Needless to state that if any document is asked for by the respondents, the same shall be furnished by the petitioner within a week.

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 NAVIN CHAWLA, J SEPTEMBER 3, 2021