The Court dismissed W.P.(C) 1372/2024 challenging the Council’s decision to grant Grade Pay to Machine Men under the Government of India Presses. The Bench rejected the petitioner’s reliance on an Office Memorandum, holding the Tribunal’s order sustainable.
The writ petition and pending application were dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~2
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 01.05.2025
versus
SATISH KUMAR & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr.Ramesh Rawat, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA
NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL)
“10. While allowing the same the competent authority amongst the respondents is directed to forthwith issue orders extending the Grade Pay of Rs. 2,800/- in terms of the notification dated 28.07.2009 to the applicants forthwith w.e.f. the date of entitlement.
11. Pursuant to the said order, the
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 1372/2024 By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Da te:0 7.05.2025 19:12:16
Page 1 of 3
respondents shall be obliged to issue another order granting them all consequential benefits including but not restricted to promotion/financial upgradation in terms of their entitlement.
12. These directions shall be complied with, including the actual release of the financial benefits, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. In the event the respondents comply with these directions including the actual release of the financial dues within the stipulated period, the applicants shall not be entitled to interest thereupon.
13. However, in the event of delay, the said payment shall be accompanied by interest payable at the rate applicable on the deposits in GPF for such period till actual payment is released.”
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 1372/2024 By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Da te:0 7.05.2025 19:12:16
Page 2 of 3
counsel for the petitioner.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J
MINI PUSHKARNA, J
MAY 1, 2025/sg/ik
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 1372/2024 By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Da te:0 7.05.2025 19:12:16
Page 3 of 3
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging the Central Administrative Tribunal’s order granting Grade Pay to respondents is liable to be allowed.
Whether the impugned order of the Tribunal violating provisions of Office Memorandum dated 07.02.2012 is legally sustainable.
Whether a constitutional writ is maintainable to quash the Tribunal’s decision.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Union of India
Satish Kumar
Navin Chawla
Mini Pushkarna
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
