Full Text
Translation output
W.P.(C) 201/2018
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Order: January 09, 2018
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Order: January 09, 2018
W.P.(C) 201/2018 & CM 816/2018
ARUN KUMAR ROY ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Malaya Kumar Chand and Mr. B.S. Jarial, Advocates
ARUN KUMAR ROY ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Malaya Kumar Chand and Mr. B.S. Jarial, Advocates
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Akshay Makhija, CGSC and Ms. Seerat Singh, Advocate for respondent
No.1 Mr. Milanka Chaudhury and Mr. Biswajit Choudhury, Advocates for respondent No.2
Ms. Anjana Gosain, Ms. Rabiya Singh Thakur and Ms. Shalini Nair, Advocates for respondent
No.3-AAI
Through: Mr. Akshay Makhija, CGSC and Ms. Seerat Singh, Advocate for respondent
No.1 Mr. Milanka Chaudhury and Mr. Biswajit Choudhury, Advocates for respondent No.2
Ms. Anjana Gosain, Ms. Rabiya Singh Thakur and Ms. Shalini Nair, Advocates for respondent
No.3-AAI
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR O R D E R (ORAL)
Petitioner claims to have superannuated as Associate General
Manager (HR) from Delhi International Authority Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘DIAL’) on 31st January, 2012. It is matter of record that petitioner had earlier worked with respondent-Airport Authority of India
(hereinafter referred to as ‘AAI’) and he opted to get absorbed in DIAL on 1st May, 2007. Petitioner further claims that he had sought re-fixation of his pension vide letter of 6th July, 2015 (Annexure P-5 colly.) from 2018:DHC:202
Petitioner claims to have superannuated as Associate General
Manager (HR) from Delhi International Authority Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘DIAL’) on 31st January, 2012. It is matter of record that petitioner had earlier worked with respondent-Airport Authority of India
(hereinafter referred to as ‘AAI’) and he opted to get absorbed in DIAL on 1st May, 2007. Petitioner further claims that he had sought re-fixation of his pension vide letter of 6th July, 2015 (Annexure P-5 colly.) from 2018:DHC:202
W.P.(C) 201/2018 respondent-DIAL. Thereafter, petitioner had sought settlement of his pension claim from the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner
(hereinafter referred to as ‘RPFC) vide application of 7th June, 2017.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that no response to the aforesaid letter has been received from respondent-RPFC till date.
None appears on behalf of respondent-RPFC despite service of advance notice.
In the facts and circumstances of this case, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of this petition with direction to respondent-RPFC to give a speaking response to petitioner’s letter of 7th June, 2017 within a period of six weeks from today, if not already replied. The response to aforesaid letter of 7th June, 2017 be positively conveyed to petitioner within a week thereafter, so that petitioner may avail of the remedies as available in law, if need be.
Respondent-RPFC be apprised of this order forthwith to ensure its compliance.
With aforesaid directions, this petition and the application are disposed of.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JANUARY 09, 2018 s 2018:DHC:202
(hereinafter referred to as ‘RPFC) vide application of 7th June, 2017.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that no response to the aforesaid letter has been received from respondent-RPFC till date.
None appears on behalf of respondent-RPFC despite service of advance notice.
In the facts and circumstances of this case, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of this petition with direction to respondent-RPFC to give a speaking response to petitioner’s letter of 7th June, 2017 within a period of six weeks from today, if not already replied. The response to aforesaid letter of 7th June, 2017 be positively conveyed to petitioner within a week thereafter, so that petitioner may avail of the remedies as available in law, if need be.
Respondent-RPFC be apprised of this order forthwith to ensure its compliance.
With aforesaid directions, this petition and the application are disposed of.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JANUARY 09, 2018 s 2018:DHC:202
JUDGMENT