AWADHESH NARAYAN CHHABINARAYAN SINGH v. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND 4 OTHERS
WP/1909/2016 · 2025-12-24
Aarti A Sathe, Shri G S Kulkarni
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 75325 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 75325 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
7-WP-1909-2016 (OS).DOC Prajakta Vartak IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1909 OF 2016 Awadhesh Narayan Chhabinarayan Singh ...Petitioner Versus The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors.
...Respondents _________ Mr. Vaibhav Singh with Mr. V. K. Sharma i/b. Mr. Ram Ugrah Singh for Petitioner. Mr. V. M. Parkar for Respondent Nos.1 to 5. __________
CORAM:
G. S. KULKARNI & AARTI SATHE, JJ. DATE:
24 DECEMBER 2025. P.C.
1. Although substantive prayers, i.e., prayer clauses (a), (aa) and (b), have been made in the petition, learned counsel for the petitioner has fairly stated that the only grievance of the petitioner is in regard to whether the pension being paid to the petitioner is calculated on the basis of two increments which were earlier withheld. The case of respondent no.1 is that the pension is being calculated and paid as if the two increments were not withheld. However, as there is no clarity on such issue and since this is the only grievance which remains to be considered, we are of the opinion that further adjudication of this be not taken forward. We, therefore, direct respondent no.1 to provide the calculation of the pension being paid and to clearly indicate to the petitioner whether the said calculation is based on the two increments which, according to respondent no.1, were not withheld. All contentions of the parties in that regard are expressly kept open. 24 December 2025 PRAJAKTA SAGAR VARTAK Digitally signed by PRAJAKTA SAGAR VARTAK Date: 2025.12.24 20:22:33 +0530
7-WP-1909-2016 (OS).DOC
2. Necessary action be taken within a period of 15 days from the date on which a copy of this order is made available.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has also fairly stated that the petitioner shall not claim any difference in salary from respondent no.1 on account of the stoppage of the two increments. The statement is accepted.
4. Needless to observe that the pension shall be calculated from the date of retirement.
5. Writ petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs.
(AARTI SATHE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.) 24 December 2025