Dismissed

Chander Mohan v. Union of India and Anr.

Delhi HC20 Jan 2020W.P.(C)/623/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the non-recognition of National Saving Certificates after records were found untraceable. The court held that the earlier dismissal on grounds of delay and laches barred a fresh cause of action. The appeal was rejected without prejudice to earlier directions.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; no direction to release maturity amount.

Chander Mohan Vs Union of India and Anr. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2020)

¶1

$~59

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 623/2020 CHANDER MOHAN ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Ravinder Singh, Ms.Priyam Agarwal, Ms.Raveesha Gupta, Advs.

¶4

versus

¶5

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Vikram Jetly, CGSC with Mr.Nikhil Bhardwaj, Adv. for R-1-2.

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 20.01.2020 CMs 1705-06/2020

¶10

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶11

WP(C) 623/2020

¶12

This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order/letter dated 15.07.2019 issued by the respondents as also for the writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release the maturity amount invested in 10 National Saving Certificates vide Registration No. DO-015011 to 015020.

¶13

The petitioner had earlier filed a writ petition being WP(C) No.18486/2004 tilted Chander Mohan vs. UOI. The same was dismissed by this Court by its order dated 03.12.2004, on the ground of delay and laches. It was further held that on this ground no direction can be passed in the writ petition, however, the respondents were still directed to make an endeavour to locate the records and if the same are located, to process the claim of the petitioner. Three

¶14

months were granted to the respondents to communicate the result of such exercise to the petitioner. The petitioner claims that the petitioner did not receive any communication from the respondent thereafter, but kept representing to the respondents.

¶15

Eventually, by the Impugned orders/communications dated 05.06.2018 and 15.07.2019, the Department of Posts has reiterated that the records are not traceable.

¶16

In my view, these letters will not give a fresh cause of action to the petitioner. In fact, even after dismissal of the earlier petition on the ground of delay and laches, there is absolutely no justification for the petitioner to have waited for another period of 16 years before filing the present petition.

¶17

The petition is therefore, dismissed.

¶18

NAVIN CHAWLA, J

¶19

JANUARY 20, 2020 RN

Chander Mohan v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chander Mohan v. Union of India and Anr.

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

Sarita Kaushik Vs Union of India and Anr.

Maharishi Dayanand Educational Society and Anr. Vs National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.

Pranav Bharadwaj Vs the Oriental Insurance Company Limited

Rajesh Vs Union of India and Anr.

Sovon Kr. Mukherjee & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Irb Goa Tollway Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Hill Queen Society Vs National Council for Teacher Education

Dr. Ruchi Malhotra Vs District Appropriate Authority (West)

Oriental Structural Engineers Pvt. Ltd. Vs National Highways Authority of India & Ors.

M/S the Ritz (a Unit of Tristar Hospitality) Vs Delhi Pollution Control Committee

Charu Chawla Vs Chetanya Anand

Simbhaoli Sugars Ltd. Vs Dr Gsc Rao

Association of Private Airport Operators Vs Union of India & Anr.

Pratap Raj Pandey & Ors. Vs Investor Education and Protection Fund Authority & Anr.