Disposed¶26

Shri Raj Bir Singh Nagar v. Food Corporation of India

Delhi HC13 Mar 2026W.P.(C)/3224/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of in view of the Sanction Order dated 11.03.2026 granting the requisite interest; the Court directed that the requisite amount be released to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. Exemption applications CM APPLs.15507/2026 and 15508/2026 were allowed subject to all just exceptions. ¶26

Shri Raj Bir Singh Nagar Vs Food Corporation of India — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, a retired officer of the respondent Food Corporation of India, is entitled to the mandatory statutory simple interest under Section 7(3A) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 on delayed payment of differential gratuity (DCRG).

¶14

Court's answer

Since the respondent's Sanction Order dated 11.03.2026 has granted the petitioner the requisite interest on delayed differential gratuity, no orders are required to be passed in the present petition.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

The requisite amount (the sanctioned interest) is to be released to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible.

¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (W.P.(C) 3224/2026, High Court of Delhi, Sachin Datta, J., decided 13.03.2026) filed by a retired Ex-AGM (General) of the Food Corporation of India complaining of non-payment of the mandatory statutory simple interest under Section 7(3A) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 on delayed differential gratuity (DCRG). At the outset, learned counsel for the respondent, appearing on advance notice, submitted that a Sanction Order dated 11.03.2026 had been passed granting the requisite interest — Rs. 97,276/- being interest on differential DCRG of ₹77,188/- for the period 16.06.1969 to 31.12.1973, calculated at 7.1% per annum, issued in continuation to earlier sanction orders dated 31.10.2007, 05.12.2007, 25.11.2009 and 31.10.2025. Holding that no further orders were required, the Court disposed of the petition and directed that the requisite amount be released to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. The exemption applications (CM APPLs. 15507/2026, 15508/2026) were allowed subject to all just exceptions.

¶1

$~105

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 3224/2026

¶4

SHRI RAJ BIR SINGH NAGAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Yashdeep and Mr. Deepak Rana, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Om Prakash, SC, Mr. Rajeev Pathak, Adv. for FCI.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

¶9

O R D E R % 13.03.2026

¶10

CM APPLs.15507/2026, 15508/2026 (Exemption)

¶11

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶12

Applications stand disposed of.

¶13

W.P.(C) 3224/2026 and CM APPL.15506/2026

¶14

The grievance raised in the present petition is that the respondent has been remiss in paying the mandatory statutory simple interest under Section 7(3A) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 on delayed differential gratuity payment.

¶15

At the outset, learned counsel for the respondent, who appears on advance notice, submit s that a Sanction Order dated 11.03.2026 has been passed, whereby the requisite interest has been granted to the petitioner. The said Sanction Order reads as under:

¶16

“ File No.: FCI HQ-Pens012/5/2024-PENSIONDated: 11.03.2026

¶17

SANCTION ORDER

¶18

In continuation to Sanction orders, dated 31.10.2007, 05.12.2007,

¶19

This is a digitally signed order. 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 16/03/2026 at 17:23:19

¶20

25.11.2009 and 31.10.2025, the sanction of the Competent Authority is hereby conveyed to Sh. Rajbir Singh Nagar, Ex-AGM (Genl.) who retired on 31.10.2007 for an amount of Rs.97,276/- (Rupees Ninety Seven Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Six). This amount pertains to interest on delayed payment of differential DCRG of ₹77,188/ - for the period 16.06.1969 to 31.12.1973, calculated at the rate of 7.1% per annum as notified by the Ministry of Finance (Department of Economic Affairs) vide Notification No.CG-DL-E10102025-266844 dated 10.10.2025, under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, for the service rendered by him in the Food Corporation of India.

¶21

This issues with the approval of the competent Authority.

¶22

-sd-

¶23

(Santosh Kumar) Assistant General Manager (Pension) For Executive Director (Personnel)

¶24

Sh. Rajbir Singh Nagar, Ex-AGM (Genl.) H.NO.98, Sector-19 Faridabad, Haryana. Mobile No.:9968093495 ”

¶25

In view thereof, no orders are required to be passed in the present petition.

¶26

The same is accordingly, disposed of.

¶27

Let the requisite amount be released to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible.

¶28

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶29

MARCH 13, 2026/ cl

¶30

This is a digitally signed order.

¶31

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 16/03/2026 at 17:23:19

Shri Raj Bir Singh Nagar v. Food Corporation of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Raj Bir Singh Nagar v. Food Corporation of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ilmas Naqvi Vs Union of India & Ors.

Amit Kumar & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Raghubir Singh Vs Gnctd & Anr.

Pawan Bhimsaria Vs Cpio Union Bank of India Mumbai

Antique Marbonite Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board and Ors.

Celine Mathew Vs Directorate of Enforcement & Anr.

Om Prakash and Anr. Vs Tyhe Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Air Force Educational and Cultural Society Vs Sh. Ramesh N. Gandhi

Smt. Kailash Kumari Tuteja Vs Harsh Kumar Tuteja and Anr.

Wushu Association of India (Wai) Vs Mr Vipin Kumar Saini & Ors.

Kleenoil Filtration India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Udit Khatri & Anr.

Anuj Malhotra Vs State

M/S. Triune Projects Private Limited Vs Mr Nikhil Kumar Commissioner of State GST and Vat, Department of Trade and Taxes, Delhi

Geeta Panwar & Ors. Vs Vedita Reddy