Disposed

Puja Kumar v. Union of India & Anr.

Delhi HC6 Apr 2018W.P.(C)/3362/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge disposed of three petitions concerning regularization of compassionately appointed service. The court directed the second respondent to consider the petitioners' representations and pass a speaking order within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Permitted petitioners to make concise representations; directed second respondent to consider them and pass a speaking order within eight weeks.

Puja Kumar Vs Union of India & Anr. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶2

Date of Order: April 06, 2018

¶3

- W.P.(C) 3362/2018 & CM 13263/2018 + W.P.(C) 3375/2018 & CM 13282/2018 + W.P.(C) 3376/2018 & CM 13283/2018

¶4

PUJA KUMAR LAXMI RANA VASUDHA SRIVASTAVA .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Pushpendra Kumar, Mr. Pavan Kumar and Mr. Prevendra Kumar, Advocates

¶5

versus

¶6

UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Vikram Jetly, CGSC for respondent No. 1-UOI Mr. Lalit Bhasin, Ms. Ratna D. Dhingra, Ms. Bhavna Dhami and Mr. Ajay Pratap Singh, Advocates for respondent No. 2

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR O R D E R

¶8

(ORAL)

¶9

In the above-captioned three petitions, the claim of petitioners is that they were appointed on compassionate ground and they have rendered service of about 16 years. It is case of petitioners that they had sought regularization of their service vide various Representations and the last Representation was made by petitioners to second respondent on 30th January, 2017, which was followed by Reminder of 9^th March, 2017. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for parties, these three petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of by this

¶10

W.Ps.(C) 3362/2018, 3375/2018 & 3376/2018

¶11

Page 1 of 2

¶12

common order. The grievance of petitioners in these three petitions is that their Representations have not been dealt with by second respondent.

¶13

In the facts and circumstances of this case, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of these three petitions with permission to petitioners to make concise Representations to second respondent within a week and if such Representations are received by second respondent, then the said Representations be effectively considered by second respondent by passing a speaking order thereon, within a period of eight weeks and the fate of the Representations be conveyed to petitioners within a week thereafter, so that petitioners may avail of the remedies as available in law, if need be.

¶14

With aforesaid directions, the above-captioned three petitions and the applications are disposed of.

¶15

Copy of this order be given dasti to counsels for petitioners and the second respondent.

¶16

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE

¶17

APRIL 06, 2018 s

¶18

W.Ps.(C) 3362/2018, 3375/2018 & 3376/2018

¶19

Page 2 of 2

Puja Kumar v. Union of India & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Puja Kumar v. Union of India & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sh. Dhanpal Vs Land and Building Department and Anr.

Delhi Jal Board Vs Vimal Kumar

Dev Narayan Vs the Mgmt.of M/S Auto Precision

Rajender Kumar Sharma Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation

Ravinder Gupta Vs State Bank of India and Anr.

Chadha Sports (Regd.) Vs Public Works Department, Gnctd and Ors.

State Bank of India Vs Satish Kumar Mittal

State Bank of India Vs Satish Kumar Mittal

K N Aithal Vs Canara Bank and Anr.

Sh. Alok Tripathi Vs Competition Commission of India and Anr.

Pramod Popli Vs Saumya Gupta

Master Hardik Sharma (Minor) through His Mother Geeta Sharma Vs Bal Bharti Public School & Anr.

Suresh Kumar Yadav Vs Union of India & Ors.

Vasudha Srivastava Vs Union of India & Anr.