High CourtsDivision Bench

Santosh Kumar vs Union Of India And Or

Delhi High Court · Decided on 15 January 2021 · Citation: (2021) 01 DEL CK 0117

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manmohan, J · Asha Menon, J
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 640 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

20 paragraphs · 386 words

Manmohan, J

1.

The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioner in this petition claim to be similarly placed to the petitioners in Brijlal Kumar v. Union of

India and others connected petitions 2020 SCC OnLine Del 1477 and the petitioners 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 seek the same relief as

claimed therein i.e. of pro rata pension.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner in this petition, on enquiry, states that the requisite No Objection Certificates (NOCs) has been filed along with

the petition.

4.

Learned counsels for the respondents fairly state that subject to the right to verification and the right of appeal to the Supreme Court against the

judgment in Brijlal Kumar (supra) being saved, the petition be disposed of.

5.

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of directing the respondents Indian Air Force that within twelve weeks herefrom, if they find the petitioner to

be similarly placed as the petitioners in Govind Kumar Srivastava (supra) and Brijlal Kumar (supra) and other connected petitions supra, to grant him

the same relief as granted in those petitions i.e. by payment of arrears of pro rata pension from the date of discharge till the date of payment and in

future to continue to pay pro rata pension to the petitioners. However, if on verification it is found that the petitioner, for any reason, is not entitled to

pro rata pension for reasons other than those stated in the judgments in Govind Kumar Srivastava (supra) and Brijlal Kumar (supra) and other

connected petitions supra 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.

6.

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.

7.

The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. Copy of the order be also forwarded to the learned counsel through e-mail.