Rekha Mehta as Rule issued and made absolute.
Unfortunately in spite of all this numberhing was done companysequently these two writ petitions were filed before this Court.
This Court passed the order in the case of Smt.
It is also number in dispute that Smt.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by OZA, J. After hearing the learned companynsel for parties it clearly emerges that the two petitioners and one Smt.
There is also reference to the Govt.
2,000 to the petitioner.
Rekha Mehta who had filed a petition earlier were all the employ ees of one institution known as Nari Kiketan.
Arguments heard.
of India, Minis try of Personnel Training, Public Grievances Pensions and it is stated that in the opinion of these departments the judgment of this Court in Smt.
Rekha Mehta as they belong to the services of Nan Niketan institution, subsequently absorbed in the services of Delhi Administration.
4 2 3 79 DSW ESTT dated 27.2.80.
It is also number in dispute that these petitioners repeatedly approached the respondent Delhi Administration and made representations for getting the pensionary benefits as were granted to Smt.
These facts are number disputed.
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
Thereafter these two petitioners have again filed writ petitions alleging that they have retired and therefore they are entitled to the same pensionary benefits which were given to Smt.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition Civil No.
It is also number in dispute that all the three persons mentioned above, the two petitioners and Smt.
This institu tion was fully funded by Delhi Administration and was company trolled by Board managing the affairs.
Learned companynsel appearing for the Delhi Administra tion attempted to companytend that the decision in the case of Smt.
Rekha Mehta will number be applicable but realising the difficulty he only read through the affidavit filed in return wherein a long story as to how the papers tossed from department to department and ultimately numberdecision was taken.
Rekha Mehta after the orders were passed by this Honble Court.
1055 and 1088 of 1988.
On 1.12.79 the Board was superseded and the institution was taken over by the Delhi Administration and the staff of this institution Nari Niketan was absorbed in the Delhi Administration vide Order No.
Rekha Mehta when after retirement was number given pensionary benefits she filed a petition in this Court No.
By this order about 20 officials were absorbed in time scale and pay as were being drawn by them prior to 1.12.79.
C. Mahajan, Mrs. Kitty K. Manglam and Ms. A. Subha shini for the Respondents.
C 539 of 1987.
Rekha Mehta, are identically situated in respect of their companyditions of service.
P. Kapur for the petitioners.
The respondent will pay companyts quantified at Rs.
The respondents arc directed to calcu late the pension and other retiral benefits of the petitioner taking into account her an tecedent of service before absorption and pay the same as early as possible and in any event number later than three months from today.
