DR. PAWAN KUMAR JAIN vs MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI

Judgment text excerpt

$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 16931/2024 & CM APPL. 71738/2024 DR. PAWAN KUMAR JAIN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Atul Gupta, Adv. for Mr. Umesh Singh, Mr. Ankit Bhadouria, Advs. versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Ms. Manisha Tyagi and Ms. Monika, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL ORDER (ORAL) % 06.03.2025 C.HARI SHANKAR, J. W.P.(C) 16931/2024 1. This writ petition assails order dated 17 May 2024 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal1 in a batch of OAs of which OA 2144/2023 stands disposed of. 2. The petitioner approached the Tribunal as all his retiral benefits had not been paid to him at the time of his retirement. He, therefore, sought disbursal of the retiral benefits along with interest. 1 “Tribunal” hereinafter W.P.(C) 16931/2024 Signature Not Verified Page 1 of 4 Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR Signing Date:08.03.2025 15:59:29 3. The Tribunal has, by the impugned order, noted that there was delay in releasing the retiral dues of the petitioner. The respondent was, therefore, directed to release retiral dues within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order of the Tribunal, failing which the petitioner was held to be entitled to interest at the rate of 12% from the date of expiry of the said period of three months. 4. The petitioner in OA 3290/20232 filed RA 70/2024 before the Tribunal seeking clarification regarding interest. The Tribunal has modified para 6 of its order to read thus: “6. In the light of the above facts and circumstances of the case, it is an undisputed fact that there has been delay in releasing the retiral dues to the applicant. Therefore, on the basis of well settled law, as enumerated herein above, all the O