Disposed

Arjun Dass & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC9 Mar 2016W.P.(C)/8/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners from the Railway Protection Force challenged pay fixation disparities under the ACP Scheme compared to junior promotions. The Court, relying on settled law in T.S. Dagar, rejected the substantive claim but allowed a joint representation on the matter within two weeks for disposal within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to file a joint representation within two weeks for consideration within six weeks.

Arjun Dass & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

$~9

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 8/2016

¶4

ARJUN DASS & ORS ..... Petitioners Through : Ms. Saahila Lamba, Advocate

¶5

versus

¶6

UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through: : Mr. J.K. Singh, Advocate

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 09.03.2016

¶10

The four petitioners in this case were initially appointed on the post of “Rakshak” in the Railway Protection Force, which was redesignated as “Constable”, and they were promoted to higher ranks in due course of time. The petitioner No.1 and petitioner no. 4 had retired from the post of SI on 3.4.2015 and 30.9.2013 respectively and the petitioners No.2 & 3 are continuing to work on the post of SI with the respondents.

¶11

The grievance of the petitioners is that due to the faulty implementation of the ACP Scheme, their pay fixation was done by the respondents at a lesser scale as compared to their juniors, who had not qualified in the limited departmental competitive examination held for the post of Head Constable, but they had been promoted as Assistant Sub Inspectors and Sub Inspectors upon clearing the limited departmental competitive examination subsequently.

¶12

W.P.(C)No.8/2016 Page 1 of 3

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that identical grievance was raised by the petitioners in WP(C)No.5867/2003 entitled „T.S. Dagar & Ors. vs. UOI & Ors.‟ which was decided on 7.12.2009, followed by judgment dated 03.1.2014 in WP(C)No.7840/2012 entitled „Tejbir Singh Dagar & Ors. vs. UOI & Ors.‟ and WP(C)No.8826/2014 entitled „Yudhister Mudgal & Ors. vs. UOI & Ors.‟ decided on 6.4.2015. Aggrieved by the judgment delivered in the case of T.S. Dagar (supra), the Union of India had preferred a SLP before the Supreme Court, which was dismissed on 12.5.2010.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the principle of law declared in the case of T.S. Dagar (supra) having attained finality, the petitioners herein are entitled to the same relief as granted to the similarly placed personnel in the cases referred to herein above.

¶15

On a perusal of the writ petition, it transpires that prior to filing the present petition, the petitioners had submitted individual representations ventilating their grievances before the respondents (Annexure-P-6 (colly), but they did not take any decision thereon, thus compelling them to file the present petition.

¶16

Having regard to the fact that the legal position now stands settled in view of the judgment in the case of T.S. Dagar (supra), the present petition is disposed of with liberty granted to the petitioners to file a joint representation within two weeks, which shall be considered and decided by the respondents in the light of the law laid down in the decisions referred to herein above, by passing a speaking order under written intimation to the petitioners within six weeks from the date of receipt of the said representation.

¶17

W.P.(C)No.8/2016 Page 2 of 3

¶18

If the grievance of the petitioners still survives, they shall be entitled to seek their remedies in accordance with law.

¶19

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶20

HIMA KOHLI, J

¶21

SUNIL GAUR, J
MARCH 09, 2016
sk/ap

¶22

W.P.(C)No.8/2016 Page 3 of 3

Arjun Dass & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun Dass & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravi Shankar Sahu Vs Jawaharlal Nehru University

Inderjit Banga Vs Registrar, Coop. Societies, Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Rammi Kapur Vs Registrar, Coop. Societies, Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Sandeep Jain & Anr. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

D.P. Sharma Vs M/S Bses Rajdhani Power Limited

Mount Carmel School Society Vs Union of India & Anr.

Sushma Arora Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Ramesh Kumar Vs UOI & Ors.

Y.L.Mala Devi Vs UOI

Head Constable Dale Singh Vs UOI & Ors.

Raj Kumar Pandey Vs Union of India & Anr.

Yogesh Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ashutosh Rathi Vs Union of India & Ors.

K Bhaskara Rao Vs Union of India & Ors.