Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Union Of India & Ors vs Birbal Singh Raiwar on 20 March, 2017

Bench: Govind Mathur, Vinit Kumar Mathur

     HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                      JODHPUR
             D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13709 / 2016
1. Union of India through the Secretary to the Government,
Ministry of Defence, Raksha Bhawan, New Delhi.

2. Chief Engineer, Southern Command, Pune.

3. Commander Works Engineer, Air Force, MES, Jodhpur.

4. Garrison Engineer, Army (central), Jodhpur.

5. Engineer-in-chief Branch, Integrated HQ of Ministry of Defence,
Kashmir House, New Delhi-110011.

6. Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (pension), Draupadi
Ghat, Allahabad-14

                                                     ----Petitioners

                              Versus

Birbal Singh Raiwar S/o Shri B.R. Raiwar, age about 62 years,
retired Office Superintendent in the Office of Commander Works
Engineer, MES Air Force, Jodhpur, R/o- 69, Abhay Nagar Scheme,
Opposite KV No. 1, Air Force Area, Jodhpur.

                                                    ----Respondent
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s)   : Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi
_____________________________________________________
           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR Order 20/03/2017 Under the order dated 24.11.2016 a coordinate Bench of this Court issued notice to the respondent on a limited question as to why the order passed by the Tribunal be not modified to grant notional promotion with revision of pensionary benefits only.

(2 of 2) [CW-13709/2016] From perusal of the order impugned dated 09.04.2015, we do not find any direction by the Tribunal for making actual payment of monitory benefits to the original applicant.

Be that as it may, the Petitioner if finding any confusion with regard to the consequential benefits flowing in favour of the original applicant as a consequence of direction given, then the appropriate Court available is to have clarification by Central Administrative Tribunal and not by way of filing the petition.

In view of it, this petition is dismissed. The petitioner is at liberty to file an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur for clarification, if required. (VINIT KUMAR MATHUR)J. (GOVIND MATHUR)J. Ramesh/48