Allowed¶16

Sanjay Kumar Pathak & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC13 Nov 2025W.P.(C)/16189/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi HC; W.P.(C) 16189/2025; Sanjay Kumar Pathak & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.; order 13.11.2025; bench Dinesh Mehta & Vimal Kumar Yadav JJ; grade pay parity; Grade Pay Rs. 5400/- on completion of four years in Grade Pay Rs. 4800/-; salary re-fixation within 2 months; arrears within 4 months; relies on/applies Sushil Kumar W.P.(C) No. 690/2022 (judgment 09.09.2024) and Sitaram Barwal & Ors. W.P.(C) 16003/2025 (Division Bench, 16.10.2025); CM APPL. 70952/2025; Respondents could not distinguish precedent; petition allowed and disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Entitlement to Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- on completion of four years in Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/-; re-fixation of salary within two months and payment of arrears within four months; writ petition and all interlocutory applications disposed of accordingly. ¶16

Sanjay Kumar Pathak & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the controversy in the present writ petition is squarely covered by precedents available to the Petitioners, given the Respondents' claim of a distinctive feature distinguishing the present case from Sushil Kumar (Supra). +1 more

¶11

Court's answer

Learned counsel for the Respondents was not in a position to distinguish the Sitaram Barwal judgment.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

The present writ petition is allowed in terms of Sushil Kumar (Supra) and the above-referred judgment in Sitaram Barwal (Supra).

¶16

Key takeaways

The Petitioners are held entitled to Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- on completion of four years in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/-.ratio¶16
The Petitioner's salary is to be re-fixed within a period of two months and arrears paid within a period of four months.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Dinesh Mehta & Vimal Kumar Yadav, JJ.), Order dated 13.11.2025 in W.P.(C) 16189/2025 (Sanjay Kumar Pathak & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.): Writ petition seeking implementation of this Court's judgment dated 09.09.2024 in Sushil Kumar vs. Union of India (W.P.(C) No. 690/2022). After Respondents' counsel pointed out a distinctive feature vis-a-vis Sushil Kumar, Petitioners filed CM APPL. 70952/2025 relying chiefly on the Division Bench judgment in Sitaram Barwal & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (W.P.(C) 16003/2025, decided 16.10.2025; Annexure A-4). As Respondents' counsel could not distinguish that judgment, the Court allowed the petition in terms of Sushil Kumar (Supra) and Sitaram Barwal (Supra), holding the Petitioners entitled to Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- on completion of four years in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/-, directing re-fixation of salary within two months and payment of arrears within four months; writ petition and interlocutory applications disposed of accordingly.

¶1

$~11

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 16189/2025

¶4

SANJAY KUMAR PATHAK & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Abhay Kumar Bhargava, Mr. Satyaarth Sinha, Ms. Shradha Mewati, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Nitinjya Chaudhry, CGSC with Mr. Rahul Mourya, Advocate.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL KUMAR YADAV

¶9

O R D E R % 13.11.2025

¶10

The present writ petition has been preferred seeking direction for implementation of the judgment dated 09.09.2024, passed by this Court in the case of Sushil Kumar vs. Union of India, W.P.(C) No. 690/2022.

¶11

On the previous date of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioners was directed to cite a judgment, which squarely covers the controversy in hand, as the counsel for the Respondents had, on that date, pointed out the distinctive feature of the present case from that of Sushil Kumar (Supra). 3. The application being CM APPL. 70952/2025 has been filed by the Petitioners along with the judgments which they claim to be in their favour. Reliance in particular has been placed on the recent judgment which has

¶12

This is a digitally signed order.

¶13

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/11/2025 at 13:16:27

¶14

been rendered in the case of Sitaram Barwal & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors., W.P.(C) 16003/2025 , decided by Division Bench of this Court on 16.10.2025, annexed as Annexure A-4 with the application.

¶15

Learned counsel for the Respondents is not in a position to distinguish the above judgment. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and considering what has been observed by the Division Bench in Para No.2, we find that the Division Bench after considering the facts, has allowed the said writ petition holding the Petitioners therein to be entitled to Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- on completion of four years in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/-.

¶16

Learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position to dispute the position of facts & law as stated above. 7. Present writ petition is, thus, allowed in terms of Sushil Kumar (Supra), so also above referred judgment of Sitaram Barwal (Supra) . 8. Petitioners herein are also held entitled to get Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/on completion of four years (in the grade pay of Rs. 4800/-). 9. The Petitioner’s salary be re-fixed within a period of two months and arrears be paid within a period of four months from today. 10. The writ petition so also all interlocutory applications stand disposed of accordingly.

¶17

DINESH MEHTA, J.

¶18

VIMAL KUMAR YADAV, J.

¶19

NOVEMBER 13, 2025/ hk

¶20

This is a digitally signed order.

¶21

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/11/2025 at 13:16:27

Sanjay Kumar Pathak & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Kumar Pathak & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mystic Vs Delhi Pollution Control Committee & Anr.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Karuna Shankar Dubey and Ors.

Shri Daulat Ram Lamba Vs the Union of India & Ors.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Sgt Abhishek Kumar (Retd.)

Inder Singh Since Deceased through Lr Krishan Rana Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Shangri-La International Hotel Management Pte. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income-Tax (International TAX)-3, Delhi & Ors.

Staff Selection Commission & Anr. Vs Vishal Samadhiya

Mantosh Das Vs Hamdard Public School and Ors.

Apeejay School Vs Ved Prakash Lakhera & Anr.

Ram Avtar Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

Umesh Chandra Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Rattan Singh Bisht and Ors. Vs Directorate of Education, Government of NCT of Delhi, through Its Director and Others & Anr.

Gurdeep Kaur Vs State