Dismissed¶¶20

Sukh Darshan Pal Verma v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC7 Jan 2026W.P.(C)/5039/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sukh Darshan Pal Verma v. Union of India & Ors., W.P.(C) 5039/2024, High Court of Delhi, decided 07.01.2026 by Anil Kshetarpal and Amit Mahajan, JJ. Keywords: interest on delayed retiral benefits; gratuity; commuted pension; provisional pension; disciplinary proceedings; judicial review of Central Administrative Tribunal (Principal Bench) order; scope of writ interference; waiver of Rs. 10,000/- cost; petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Cost of Rs. 10,000/- imposed by the Tribunal on the petitioner waived with consent of respondents' counsel; no other relief, petition dismissed with observations. ¶¶20

Sukh Darshan Pal Verma Vs Union of India & Ors. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~25

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 5039/2024 SUKH DARSHAN PAL VERMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Kumar Rajesh Singh and Ms. Punam Singh, Advocates.

¶4

versus

¶5

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents

¶6

Through: Ms. Pratima N Lakra CGSC with Mr. Shailendra Kumar Mishra, Mr. Chanakya Kene and Ms. Manshi, Advocates.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 07.01.2026

¶10

By the present writ petition, the petitioner assails the order dated 12.02.2024, passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench at New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’ ) in O.A. No. 2174/2020 titled as Sukh Darshan Pal Verma vs. Union of India & Ors.

¶11

The petitioner prays for grant of interest on account of delayed release of his retiral benefits.

¶12

Admittedly two different disciplinary proceedings were pending against the petitioner which were concluded on 22.05.2017 and 27.09.2018. The petitioner was paid provisional pension w.e.f. 01.02.2016 whereas his commuted pension was released on 29.03.2019 and amount of gratuity was released on 03.09.2019. Thus, the Tribunal has concluded that there is a short period of delay after

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

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 09/01/2026 at 11:48:48

¶15

the conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings. The learned Tribunal also imposed a cost of ₹10,000/- on the petitioner.

¶16

We have heard the learned counsel representing the parties at length.

¶17

Though the learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that there is a delay of nearly one year in releasing the amount of gratuity, it is pertinent to note that the Tribunal after considering all aspects of the matter has found that the delay in release of the pensionary benefits was not inordinate. The amount has already been released.

¶18

In exercise of writ jurisdiction, this Court is not expected to interfere in each and every matter, and no ground warranting interference is made out.

¶19

However, with the consent of the learned counsel representing the respondents, the cost of ₹10,000/- imposed upon the petitioner shall stand waived.

¶20

The present petition stands dismissed with aforesaid observations.

¶21

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J

¶22

AMIT MAHAJAN, J

¶23

JANUARY 7, 2026 DU

¶24

This is a digitally signed order.

¶25

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 09/01/2026 at 11:48:48

Sukh Darshan Pal Verma v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukh Darshan Pal Verma 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N. K. Bagrodia Public School, Dwarka, & Anr. Vs Directorate of Education & Anr.

Sunil Sharma Vs Rail Land Development Authority & Anr.

Rwa, Nangal Dewat Vs Delhi Development Authority and Ors.

Akhilesh Kumar Jain and Ors. Vs Registrar of Societies and Ors.

Riyazuddin Vs Jamia Millia Islamia & Anr.

Churchill Brothers Sports Club Pvt. Ltd. Vs All India Football Federation & Anr.

Ajay Kumar Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Nikita Anand Vs the Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Dinesh Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Union Public Service Commission Vs Haimanti Bhattacharya & Anr.

M S Taruna Textiles Vs Welcome Saree Creation Pvt. Ltd.