Allowed

Ajay Kumar Mann v. Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd. (Tpddl)

Delhi HC16 Nov 2016W.P.(C)/4176/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by an employee seeking seniority and promotion benefits from 1.7.2013. Court held that mere pendency of an old FIR without suspension, chargesheet, or prosecution bars enjoyment of benefits under the Government circular dated 8.1.2003. Petitioner granted relief.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be given all service benefits including seniority and promotion w.e.f. 1.7.2013.

Ajay Kumar Mann Vs Tata Power Delhi… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

$~10

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 4176/2015

¶4

AJAY KUMAR MANN ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Bishwambhar D. Sharma, Advocate with Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate.

¶5

versus

¶6

TATA POWER DELHI DISTRIBUTION LTD. (TPDDL)..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sujit Kumar Singh, Advocate.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA

¶8

O R D E R % 16.11.2016

¶9

C.M. No.7566/2015 (exemption)

¶10

Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.

¶11

C.M. stands disposed of.

¶12

+W.P.(C) No.4176/2015

¶13

By this writ petition, the petitioner who is an employee of the respondent seeks the relief of being granted benefits of seniority and promotion w.e.f 1.7.2013. The case of the petitioner is that merely because an FIR No.287/1999 was pending, and which is over 15 and half years old at

¶14

the time of filing of the writ petition, the petitioner cannot be denied service

¶15

W.P.(C) No.4176/2015 page 1 of 3

¶16

benefits including of seniority and promotion in view of the circular of the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions dated 8.1.2003. In this circular dated 8.1.2003, it is stated that the sealed cover procedure will be adopted only if an officer is under suspension or a chargesheet has been issued and departmental proceedings are pending or there is a prosecution for a criminal charge pending in a court of law against the employee.

¶17

I have put a query to the counsel for the respondent as to whether the circular dated 8.1.2003 as per the counter affidavit of the respondent is not applicable to the parties, and to which counsel for the respondent states that in the counter affidavit to the writ petition there is no denial that the circular dated 8.1.2003 binds the parties to this writ petition. It is thus seen that neither the petitioner is under suspension nor a chargesheet has been issued for disciplinary action nor is there any prosecution for a criminal charge in a court of law because there is no case pending in a court of law but there is only an FIR which was around 15 and half years old at the time of filing of the writ petition and now around 17 years old, and that there is no committing of the petitioner to a criminal case much less by

¶18

W.P.(C) No.4176/2015 page 2 of 3

¶19

filing of a charge sheet.

¶20

In view of the above, this writ petition is allowed and the

¶21

respondent is directed to give all service benefits to the petitioner in accordance with law w.e.f 1.7.2013. Parties are left to bear their own costs.

¶22

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J

¶23

NOVEMBER 16, 2016 Ne

¶24

page 3 of 3

¶25

W.P.(C) No.4176/2015

Ajay Kumar Mann v. Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd. (Tpddl)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar Mann v. Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd. (Tpddl)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anita Kathuria Vs DDA & Anr.

Ram Prasad Vs UOI and Ors.

Rahul Birla Vs Union of India & Ors.

Anil Kumar Jain Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Kusum Lata Devi Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors. Vs Babu Lal Bunkar

S.N.Singh Rathore Vs Director of Education & Anr.

M/S Retax Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs Sh. Abhinash

Gopal Ji Vs University of Delhi and Anr.

A.P. Suri Vs University of Delhi and Anr.

Ramesh Chand Gupta Vs University of Delhi and Anr.

Vijai Prakash Agrawal Vs Union of India & Anr.

Subhash Chandra Vs Punjab Natiional Bank and Ors.

Iqbal Kaur Vs Director of Education & Ors.