S David Haokip v. Union Of India & ORS.

$~65 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 178/2025 S DAVID HAOKIP .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Abhay Kumar Bhargava and Mr. Satyarsh Singh, Advs.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Ms. Avshreya Pratap Singh Rudy, Mr. Hussain Adil Taqvi, Ms. Usha Jamnal, Ms. Harshita Chaturvedi and Ms. Hepsiba Bobin, Advs. for UOI.

Mr. Rajiv Kapur and Mr.

Akshit Kapur, Adv. for SBI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR

O R D E R

% 09.01.2025 1.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:- "i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to award the petitioner the benefits of disability cover flowing from Golden Jubilee Seema Prahari Kalyan Kawach scheme run by the FHQ BSF, Administration Directorate New Delhi along with 12% interest from the date of Disability considered by the BSF Medical Board dated 01.04.2024.

ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to award the petitioner the benefits of disability cover flowing from Central Armed Police Salary Package account, along with 12% interest from the date of The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Disability considered by the BSF Medical Board dated 01.04.2024."

2.

Issue notice.

3.

At the very outset, learned counsel for the respondents, who appears on advance notice, submits that the petitioner has approached this Court without making any representation to the respondents. 4.

When faced with this situation, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for the present, the petitioner would be satisfied if the respondents are directed to consider the petitioner‟s claim, as raised in the present petition, and pass a reasoned order thereon in a time bound manner.

5.

The learned counsel for the respondents states that the respondents have no objection to this limited prayer sought by the petitioner.

6.

In the light of the aforesaid stand taken by the parties, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the petitioner‟s claim, as raised in the present petition, as a representation of the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from today. In case, the petitioner is found eligible for any relief, the respondents will grant him the same along with all consequential benefits, within a period of four weeks thereafter.

7.

It is needless to state that, in case the petitioner is aggrieved by any order passed by the respondents, it will be open for him to seek legal recourse as permissible in law.

8.

We make it clear that we have not examined the claim of the petitioner on merits.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

9.

The writ petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. NAVIN CHAWLA, J SHALINDER KAUR, J JANUARY 9, 2025 SU/F/IK Click here to check corrigendum, if any The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.