Allowed

Valdas Medhavi(Ex CPL734548 v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC18 Nov 2021W.P.(C)/13006/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition seeking pro rata pension was disposed of. The Court directed the respondents to grant pro rata pension arrears and future payments within twelve weeks if the petitioner is found similarly placed to petitioners in cited decisions. Mention of interest if arrears are not paid.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to grant pro rata pension arrears and future payments within twelve weeks if petitioner is similarly placed to petitioners in Brijlal Kumar and Govind Kumar Srivastava; interest

Valdas Medhavi(Ex CPL734548 Vs Union of India… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2021)

¶1

$~21

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

Date of Decision: 18.11.2021

¶4

W.P.(C) 13006/2021 & CM APPL. 40999/2021 VALDAS MEDHAVI(EX CPL734548 ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Manoj Kumar Gupta, Adv.

¶5

versus

¶6

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Naginder Benipal, Sr. Panel Counsel with Ms.Harithi Kambiri, Adv.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

¶9

MANMOHAN, J. (Oral)

¶10

The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner in this petition claims to be similarly placed to the petitioners in Brijlal Kumar v. Union of India and others 2020 SCC OnLine Del 1477 and the petitioner 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 26^th April, 2019] and seeks the same relief as claimed therein i.e. of pro rata pension.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner, on enquiry, states that the requisite No Objection Certificates (NOCs) had been given.

¶13

Learned counsel for the respondents fairly states that subject to right to verification and right of appeal to the Supreme Court against the judgment in Brijlal Kumar (supra) being saved, the petition be disposed of.

¶14

Signature Not Verified

¶15

Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 13006/2021 By:KRISHNA BHOJ Signing Da te:1 9.11.2021 21:43:50

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

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, 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 petitioner. 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 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. Needless to state that if any documents are asked for by the respondents, the same shall be furnished by the petitioner within a week.

¶18

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.

¶19

MANMOHAN, J

¶20

NAVIN CHAWLA, J

¶21

NOVEMBER 18, 2021/ rv

¶22

Signature Not Verified

¶23

Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 13006/2021 By:KRISHNA BHOJ Signing Da te:1 9.11.2021 21:43:50

¶24

Page 2 of 2

Valdas Medhavi(Ex CPL734548 v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Valdas Medhavi(Ex CPL734548 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

Bhartiya Janta Dal Integrated Vs the Govt. of India & Ors.

Sabre Glbl Inc. Vs Air India Limited & Anr.

Ge India Industrial Pvt. Ltd. as Successor in Interest to Ge India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd., Now Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 10 1 New Delhi & Anr.

Ge India Industrial Pvt. Ltd. (as Successor in Interest to Ge India Exports Pvt. Ltd., Now Amalgama Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, OSD-10, New Delhi & Anr.

Himanshu Bhatia Vs New Delhi Municipal Council and Ors.

Govt of NCT of Dlehi & Ors. Vs Parul Rathe & Ors.

Manoj Kumar Sharma Vs Union of India & Ors.

M/S Mittal Plastic Vs Commissioner of Delhi Value Added Tax and Anr.

Pradeep Singh, Ex Cpl 916638-K & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Manoj Kumar Poddar, Ex Cpl 733670-H Vs Union of India & Ors.

Cpl Sandeep Krishnan U K Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ex Corporal Mukesh Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.

M/S Vijay Steelcon Private Limited Vs Principal Commissioner of Central Tax (Gst) Delhi East & Ors.

Manoj Kumar Sharma Vs Union of India & Ors.