Disposed

Manmood Shankar v. Jp Bajaj, Zonal Manager, LIC and Anr.

Delhi HC2 Apr 2026CONT.CAS(C)/526/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petition alleging non-compliance of directions to recompute qualifying service and pensionary benefits. Respondents claimed compliance with payment of differential amounts; court directed disclosure of calculation basis and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to intimate petitioner in writing within two weeks the manner of pension calculations and status of gratuity and leave encashment; petition disposed of.

Manmood Shankar Vs Jp Bajaj, Zonal Manager, LIC and Anr. — Contempt of Court | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~121

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CONT.CAS(C) 526/2026

¶4

MANMOOD SHANKAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Abhinav Bhardwaj, Advocate.

¶5

versus

¶6

JP BAJAJ, ZONAL MANAGER, LIC AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Ankur Goel, Advocate.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

¶9

O R D E R % 02.04.2026

¶10

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging wilful disobedience/non-compliance of the directions contained in the order dated 07.01.2026 passed in W.P.(C) 5387/2025. The operative directions therein are as under:

¶11

“19. For the reasons recorded above, the Respondent cannot exclude the entire period between 23^rd July, 2016 and 11^th February, 2019 from the computation of qualifying service. The Respondent is directed to re-compute the Petitioner's qualifying service and the consequent pensionary benefits by treating the Petitioner as in continuous service for pensionary purposes upon reinstatement, while keeping the award's denial of back wages intact. The recomputation shall be completed within eight weeks from today and the differential amounts, if any, shall be released within two weeks thereafter.”

¶12

Learned counsel for the respondents, who appears on advance notice, submits that the necessary compliance has been made and that the additional amount to which the petitioner is entitled after re-computing the petitioner’s qualifying service, has already been paid to the petitioner.

¶13

Let the concerned respondent duly intimate to the petitioner the manner in which the calculation/s have been done to arrive at a figure of

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

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 09/04/2026 at 12:20:12

¶16

Rs.1,04,653/- towards “difference of pension commutation” and a figure of Rs.1,99,914/- towards “pension arrears”. The status as regards the calculation of the gratuity and the leave encashment shall also be disclosed to the petitioner.

¶17

Let the above disclosure/ intimation be sent to the petitioner by way of a written communication within a period of 2 weeks from today.

¶18

In case the petitioner has any outstanding grievance, he shall be at liberty to avail appropriate remedies under law.

¶19

The present petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

¶20

APRIL 2, 2026/ at

¶21

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶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 09/04/2026 at 12:20:12

Manmood Shankar v. Jp Bajaj, Zonal Manager, LIC and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manmood Shankar v. Jp Bajaj, Zonal Manager, LIC and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naveen Kumar Gupta Vs State, NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Dr. Kumar Alok Vs Shree Shatrujeet Kapur, Director General,Itbp and Others

Amrit Pahuja Vs Sudesh, Manager, Rashtriya Virjanand Andh Kanya Sr. Sec. School & Ors.

Chitturi Bharani Vs Dr Abhijat Chandrakant Sheth & Anr.

Sanjar Fazal Alam & Ors. Vs Manoj Kumar Pandey (Lac/Adm)

M/S Entasis India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mr. Rajan Bajaj, Director M/S Medisphere Marketing Ltd.

Shabnam Khan Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Rattan Polycham Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs Madan Mohan Roy & Ors.

Naveen Kumar Gupta Vs State, NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Dr. Kumar Alok Vs Shree Shatrujeet Kapur, Director General,Itbp and Others

Chitturi Bharani Vs Dr Abhijat Chandrakant Sheth & Anr.

Naresh Kumar Vs Ryan International School & Anr.

Satya Prakash Vs Ryan International School & Anr.

Gajender Vs Ryan International School & Anr.