Disposed¶14

Anil Kapur v. National Insurance Company Limited and Ors.

Delhi HC8 Dec 2025W.P.(C)/17066/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anil Kapur v. National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors., Delhi HC W.P.(C) 17066/2022, order dated 08.12.2025 (Jhingan, J.). Keywords: pensionary/retiral benefit fixation; withheld increments 2018-2019; penalty order dated 10.07.2018 reducing time scale by two stages, two years, no cumulative effect; unconsidered representation; direction to pass speaking order; disposed without adjudicating merits; liberty to seek remedies.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of without deciding merits; petitioner granted liberty to file a detailed representation within six weeks, to be considered by the respondents in accordance with law via a speaking order, expeditiously and not later than eight weeks from its receipt, with further remedies preserved. ¶14

Anil Kapur Vs National Insurance Company Limited and Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's representation regarding non-consideration of increments due for 2018 and 2019 while calculating pensionary benefits (in the wake of the penalty order dated 10.07.2018) should be addressed by the respondents.

¶2

Court's answer

The court declined to comment on the merits of the grievance because factual aspects are involved.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

The petition is disposed of, granting the petitioner liberty to file a detailed representation within six weeks.

¶14

Key takeaways

Upon the representation being filed, the respondents shall consider it in accordance with law by passing a speaking order.ratio¶17
As fixation of retiral benefits is involved, expeditious disposal is expected and the needful shall be done not later than eight weeks from receipt of the representation.ratio¶18
The petitioner remains at liberty to avail remedies in accordance with law if aggrieved by the respondents' decision.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Avneesh Jhingan, J.), W.P.(C) 17066/2022, order dated 08.12.2025: The petitioner, whose time scale had been reduced by two stages for up to two years without cumulative effect by a penalty order dated 10.07.2018, complained that the increments due for 2018 and 2019 were excluded while calculating his pensionary benefits and that his representation on this score had not been considered. The court declined to rule on merits, citing involvement of factual aspects, and disposed of the petition by directing that the petitioner may file a detailed representation within six weeks; the respondents (National Insurance Company Limited and Ors.) are to consider it in accordance with law by passing a speaking order, expeditiously and not later than eight weeks from its receipt, since fixation of retiral benefits is involved. The petitioner remains free to pursue legal remedies if aggrieved by the resulting decision. Counsel: Swarti Setia for petitioner; Hetu Arora Sethi for respondents.

¶1

$~22

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 17066/2022

¶4

ANIL KAPUR .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Ms. Swarti Setia, Adv.

¶6

versus

¶7

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Hetu Arora Sethi, Adv.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

¶10

O R D E R % 08.12.2025

¶11

This petition was filed raising a grievance that after passing of the penalty order dated 10.07.2018 reducing the time scale by two stages for a period not exceeding two years without cumulative effect, the increments due for 2018 and 2019 were not given while calculating the pensionary benefits.

¶12

The short grievance raised is that the petitioner filed a representation but same has not been considered.

¶13

Learned counsel for the respondents, on instructions, submits that the increment for the year 2019 was delayed as the petitioner remained on leave on loss of pay.

¶14

Without commenting upon the merits of the case, as factual aspects are involved, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a detailed representation within six weeks from today. In eventuality of the

¶15

This is a digitally signed order.

¶16

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 10/12/2025 at 13:31:02

¶17

representation being filed, the respondents shall consider the same in accordance with law by passing a speaking order.

¶18

As issue of fixing retiral benefits is involved, an expeditious disposal shall be appreciated. The needful shall be done not later than eight weeks from the receipt of the representation.

¶19

Needless to say, the petitioner shall be at liberty to avail remedies in accordance with law if aggrieved of the decision.

¶20

AVNEESH JHINGAN, J

¶21

DECEMBER 8, 2025 ‘ha’

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

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 10/12/2025 at 13:31:02

Anil Kapur v. National Insurance Company Limited and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kapur v. National Insurance Company Limited and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ex. Major General M.S. Jaswal Vs Union of India and Ors.

Atul Sharma Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

Ex. Major General Ms Jaswal Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ravi Prakash Mehrotra Vs Delhi Development Authority through the Vice Chairman & Anr.

Union of India & Ors. Vs Sqn Ldr Amarjeet Singh

Jatinder Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors.

M/S Max Bazaar Vs Union of India and Ors.

M/S Australian Forklift Training and Driving School Vs Bses Rajdhani Power Limited & Anr.

Kanta Vs Union of India and Ors.

Raj Kumar and Ors. Vs Sache Ram and Ors.

Md. Hadis Lari Vs Jamia Milia Islamia and Ors.

Sunil Kumar Yadav & Ors. Vs the District and Sessions Judge Headquarters & Anr.

Bal Kishan & Anr. Vs University of Delhi & Ors.

Putti Bhanu Krishnadev Vs Union of India & Ors.