Anand Pratap Singh And ORS v. Union Of India And ORS

$~60 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1743/2025 ANAND PRATAP SINGH AND ORS .....Petitioners Through:

Mr.Ankur Chhibber, Mr.Anshuman Mehrotra, Advs.

versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents Through:

Mr.Farman Ali, SPC with Ms.Usha Jamnal, Mr.Krishan Kumar, Advs.

CORAM:

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

O R D E R

% 12.02.2025 CM APPL. 8389/2025 (exemption) 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 1743/2025 2.

This petition has been filed by the petitioners praying for the following reliefs:

"I.

Issue a Writ of Certiorari for quashing of the letter dated 22.11.2024 (Anneure-P1) and 06.01.25 (Annexure-P2) issued by the Respondents wherein representations dated 07.01.2024 (Annexure-P11) and 09.12.2024 (Annexure-P12) of the Petitioners have been rejected and have denied the benefit of Nonfunctional Upgradation in the grade pay of Rs.5400/- in an arbitrary and unfair manner;

and II.

Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to grant the benefit of Nonfunctional Upgradation in the Grade Pay The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Rs.5400 in Pay Band-3 w.e.f. the date of them being eligible as granted by this Hon'ble Court vide judgment(s) dated 09.09.2024 in W.P.(C) NO.690/2022 (Annexure-P9), 14.10.2024 in W.P.(C) NO.886/2020 (Annexure-P10) and Judgment dated 06.09.2010 WP No.

13225/2010 (Annexure-P4) passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras as upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.8883/2011 vide order dated 10.102017 (Annexure-P5), along with arrears, and all other consequential benefits;"

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by the Judgment of this Court in Sushil Kumar v. Union of India & Ors., 2024:DHC:6969-DB. He submits that in spite of the same, by the Impugned Orders dated 22.11.2024 and 06.01.2025, the representation of the petitioners has not been considered, solely on the ground that the respondents have not yet received instructions from the Ministry of Home Affairs regarding the implementation on the above judgment.

4.

The learned counsel for the respondents, who appear on an advance notice, reiterates the said submission. 5.

Taking note of the above submission, we are of the view that the respondents must implement the judgment of this Court in Sushil Kumar (supra), unless the same has been challenged and an order praying its implementation has been passed by the Supreme Court.

6.

In view of the above, we dispose of the present petition by directing the respondents to consider the contents of the present The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

petition as a representation of the petitioners. In case the petitioners are found entitled to the relief in terms of our Judgment in Sushil Kumar (supra), the same should be granted to the petitioners within a period of eight weeks from today. However, if there is any order to the contrary passed by the Supreme Court, as far as Sushil Kumar (supra) is concerned, our directions would also be equally affected as far as the petitioners are concerned.

7.

With the above directions, the present petition is disposed of. NAVIN CHAWLA, J SHALINDER KAUR, J FEBRUARY 12, 2025 RN/DG 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.