P MUNI SUBHUSHAN  Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

W.P.(C) 2782/2 019 & connected Page 1 of 3
$~Suppl. -17, 20 & 25
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P. (C) 2782/2019, CM APPL.1667/2021
MADASU SAMPATH KUMAR …..Petitioner
Through: Mr.Ajit Kakkar, Advocate.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. …..Respondents
Throug h: Mr.Harsh Vaidyanathan Shankar,
Advocate.

+ W.P. (C) 4453/2019, CM APPL.1663/2021
RAMAKRUSHNA SASMAL …..Petitioner
Through: Mr.Ajit Kakkar, Advocate.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. …..Respondents
Through: Mr.Harsh Vaidyanathan Sha nkar,
Advocate.

+ W.P. (C) 2878/2020, CM APPL.1665/2021
P MUNI SUBHUSHAN …..Petitioner
Through: Mr.Ajit Kakkar, Advocate.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. …..Respondents
Through: Mr.Jivesh Kumar Tiwari, Senior
Panel Counsel

% Date of Decision: 15th January, 2021
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
HON’BLE MS . JUSTICE ASHA MENON

2021:DHC:174-DBW.P.(C) 2782/2 019 & connected Page 2 of 3
J U D G M E N T

MANMOHAN , J (Oral) :
C.M.No.1667/2021 in W.P.(C) No.2782/2019
C.M.No.1663/2021 in W.P.(C) No.4453/2019
C.M.No.1665/2021 in W.P.(C) No.2878/20 20

Keeping in view the averment s in the applications, the same is
allowed and the writ petitions are taken up for hearing today.
W.P.(C) No.2782/2019
W.P.(C) No.4453/2019
W.P.(C) No.2878/2020

1. The petitions have been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. Learned counsel for the pet itioners state s that all the petitioners in
these petitions claim to be similarly placed to the petitioners in Brijlal
Kumar v. Union of India and other s 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 26th April, 2019] and
seek the same relief as claimed therein i.e. of pro rata pension.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners in these petition s, on enquiry,
states that the requisite No Objection Certificates (NOCs) ha d been taken .
4. Learned counsels for the respondents fairly state s 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 petition s be disposed of.
5. Accordingly , the petition s 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
2021:DHC:174-DBW.P.(C) 2782/2 019 & connected Page 3 of 3
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 da te
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 or any
of them, 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 writi ng there of and in
which event, the petitioners shall be entitled to take further remedies there
against.
6. 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.
7. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. Copy of the order be
also forwarded to the learned counsel through e -mail.

MANMOHAN, J

ASHA MENON , J
JANUARY 15, 2021
KA

2021:DHC:174-DB