W.P.(C)/1099/2021 of SANTOSH KUMAR PAL (EX SGT 762571-H) Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

$~Suppl.-17 & 25

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P. (C) 1099/2021, CM APPL. 3060/2021SANTOSH KUMAR PAL (EX SGT 762571-H) .....Petitioner SANTOSH KUMAR PAL (EX SGT 762571-H) .....Petitioner

Through: Ms. Pallavi Awasthi, Advocate. Versus Versus

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Prerna Chopra, Proxy Counsel for Ms. Nidhi Raman, Advocate Through: Ms. Prerna Chopra, Proxy Counsel for Ms. Nidhi Raman, Advocate

+ YASHPAL SINGH & ORS. YASHPAL SINGH & ORS.

W.P. (C) 1151/2021, CM APPL. 3252/2021

.....Petitioners Ms. Pallavi Awasthi, Advocate.

Through:

Versus

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

.....Respondents Through: Ms. Prerna Chopra, Proxy Counsel for Ms. Nidhi Raman, Advocate for Ms. Nidhi Raman, Advocate

Date of Decision: 29[th] January, 2021

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ASHA MENON

J U M N T

MANMOHAN, J (Oral):

1.Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners in this petitions claim to be similarly placed to the petitioners in Brijlal Kumar v. Union of India and others connected petitions, 2020 SCC OnLine Del 1477 and the petitioners in Govind Kumar Srivastava v. Union of India, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 6425 (DB) [against which Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 8813/2019 has been dismissed on 26[th] April, 2019] and seek the same relief as claimed therein i.e. of pro rata pension.

W.P. (C) 1099/2021 & 1151/2021

Page 1 of 2

2.Learned counsel for the petitioners, on enquiry, states that the requisite No Objection Certificated (NOC) had been given.

3.Learned counsel for the respondents fairly states that subject to the right to verification and the right of appeal to the Supreme Court against the judgment in Brijlal Kumar (supra) being saved, the petitions be disposed of. 4.Accordingly, the petitions and applications are disposed of directing the respondents Indian Air Force that within twelve weeks herefrom, if they find the petitioners to be similarly placed as the petitioners in Govind Kumar Srivastava (supra) and Brijlal Kumar (supra) and other connected petitions supra, to grant them the same relief as granted in those petitions i.e. by payment of arrears of pro rata pension from the date of discharge till the date of payment and in future to continue to pay pro rata pension to the petitioners. However, if on verification it is found that the petitioners, for any reason, are not entitled to pro rata pension for reasons other than those stated in the judgments in Govind Kumar Srivastava (supra) and Brijlal Kumar (supra) and other connected petitions supra being in personam, the respondents, within the said twelve weeks, shall communicate to the petitioners, not so found entitled, the reasons in writing thereof and in which event, the petitioners shall be entitled to take further remedies there against. 5.If the arrears of pro rata pension are not paid within twelve weeks, the same shall also incur interest thereon @ 7% per annum from the expiry of twelve weeks till the date of payment.

MANMOHAN, J

JANUARY 29, 2021/ck

W.P. (C) 1099/2021 & 1151/2021

ASHA MENON, J