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 2, Cited by 2]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Satya Narain Singh & Ors vs Union Of India & Anr on 15 September, 2021

Author: Rajiv Shakdher

Bench: Rajiv Shakdher, Talwant Singh

                      $~41 (2021)
                      *     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                      +     W.P.(C) 3278/2021

                            SATYA NARAIN SINGH & ORS.              ..... Petitioners
                                         Through: Mr.Tushar Ranjan Mohanty, Adv.

                                                versus

                            UNION OF INDIA & ANR.                              ..... Respondents
                                          Through:            Mr.Ajay Digpaul, CGSC with
                                                              Mr.Himanshu Pathak (GP) &
                                                              Mr.Kamal R. Digpaul Adv.

                            CORAM:
                            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
                            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH

                                         ORDER

% 15.09.2021 [Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19]

1. The counter-affidavits have not been filed. Mr. Tushar Ranjan Mohanty, who appears on behalf of the petitioners, says that the issue which arises in the present case, is covered by the judgement dated 12.03.2019, passed in W.P.(C) 8193/2015, titled Union of India vs. Dr. Badri Singh Bhandari and Anr., and judgement dated 17.12.2019, passed in W.P.(C) No. 3730/2015, titled Union of India vs. Tushar Ranjan Mohanty.

2. According to Mr. Mohanty, since the respondents have already implemented the decision of the tribunal, in the case of several employees, therefore, this Court did not interfere with the decision of the Tribunal, which was assailed in the aforementioned writ petitions.

3. The grievance of the petitioners, in this case, also appears to be that W.P.(C) 3278/2021 Page 1 of 2 Signature Not Verified Signed By:HARIOM Signing Date:17.09.2021 14:09:13 they were not granted benefit of the non-functional upgradation, with effect from 01.01.2006.

4. In these circumstances, learned counsel for the respondents will obtain instructions, as to why, the petitioners cannot be given the same benefit, as was given to the respondents, in the aforementioned writ petitions.

5. List, for directions, on 08.10.2021.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J TALWANT SINGH, J SEPTEMBER 15, 2021/mr Click here to check corrigendum, if any W.P.(C) 3278/2021 Page 2 of 2 Signature Not Verified Signed By:HARIOM Signing Date:17.09.2021 14:09:13