W.P.(C)/201/2018 of ARUN KUMAR ROY Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. — W.P.(C)/201/2018 of ARUN KUMAR ROY Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Parties

B.S. Jarial, Advocates (PETITIONER)
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS (RESPONDENT)

Cites (1)

BAIL APPLN./1697/2020 of SHAHJADA IRFAN Vs THE STATE NCT OF DELHI (2020)

Statutes cited (5)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all Body

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Date of Order: January 09, 2018

W.P.(C) 201/2018 & CM 816/2018

ARUN KUMAR ROY ..... Petitioner

Through: Mr. Malaya Kumar Chand and Mr.

B.S. Jarial, Advocates

versus

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

.....Respondents

Through: Mr. Akshay Makhija, CGSC and Ms. Seerat Singh, Advocate for respondent No.1

Mr. Milanka Chaudhury and Mr. Biswajit Choudhury, Advocates for respondent No.2 Ms. Anjana Gosain, Ms. Rabiya Singh Thakur and Ms. Shalini Nair, Advocates for respondent No.3-AAI

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

O R R (ORAL)

Petitioner claims to have superannuated as Associate General Manager (HR) from Delhi International Authority Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘DIAL’) on 31[st] January, 2012. It is matter of record that petitioner had earlier worked with respondent-Airport Authority of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘AAI’) and he opted to get absorbed in DIAL on 1[st] May, 2007. Petitioner further claims that he had sought re-fixation of his pension vide letter of 6[th] July, 2015 (Annexure P-5 colly.) from

respondent-DIAL. Thereafter, petitioner had sought settlement of his pension claim from the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (hereinafter referred to as ‘RPFC) vide application of 7[th] June, 2017. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that no response to the aforesaid letter has been received from respondent-RPFC till date.

None appears on behalf of respondent-RPFC despite service of advance notice.

In the facts and circumstances of this case, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of this petition with direction to respondent-RPFC to give speaking response to petitioner’s letter of 7[th] June, 2017 within period of six weeks from today, if not already replied. The response to aforesaid letter of 7[th] June, 2017 be positively conveyed to petitioner within week thereafter, so that petitioner may avail of the remedies as available in law, if need be.

Respondent-RPFC be apprised of this order forthwith to ensure its compliance.

With aforesaid directions, this petition and the application are disposed of.

JANUARY 09, 2018

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE