Petitioner sought leave to withdraw a writ petition after his disciplinary records were upgraded and his integrity certified, negating earlier adverse observations.
Leave to withdraw the writ petition granted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~19
K. PRADEEP KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Senior Advocate with Ms. Tinu Bajwa, Advocate
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, CGSC with Ms. Gunjan Bansal & Mr. Ashish Pandey, Advocates
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
O R D E R % 18.03.2016
We have heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner, who appears along with Ms. Tinu Bajwa, Advocate. The petitioner is also present in the Court in person.
Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 28.8.2014 refers to adverse APAR grading for the year 2011-2012 and also imputes the involvement of the petitioner in a human trafficking case and his probity and integrity is not impeccable. The petitioner is aggrieved by the said recording for casting aspersions on his integrity and probity. The petitioner, learned senior counsel submits, is not pressing for appointment/absorption in the Intelligence Bureau but the said observations are to his detriment and extremely pungent.
The petitioner had objected to the said observations and thereafter Assistant Director/ACR, Intelligence Bureau (Ministry of Home Affairs), pursuant to directions given by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in the order dated 20.4.2015 in OA No.2565/2014 to examine the issue and question on the integrity and probity of the petitioner and had upgraded the overall grading to ‘5’for the year 2011-2012. The integrity has also been certified. We take on record the said noting dated 18.6.2015. The effect thereof would be that the earlier recording in the order dated 20.8.2014, which was based upon the earlier APAR, would stand negated and erased. The integrity of the petitioner has been certified and the petitioner has been given overall grading of ‘5’ for the APAR for 2011-2012.
In view of the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present writ petition. The petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J.
MARCH 18, 2016
tp
K. Pradeep Kumar
Union of India
Sanjiv Khanna
Najmi Waziri
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
