Partly allowed

Sunil Kumar S v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC14 May 2024W.P.(C)/16364/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An application for early hearing of a writ petition seeking posting at certain government stations on compassionate grounds was allowed. The court directed the respondents to treat the petition as a representation to be decided within six weeks before disposing the petition.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; respondents directed to treat petition as representation for posting decision within six weeks; writ petition disposed of; hearing date cancelled.

Sunil Kumar S Vs Union of India & Ors. — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CM APPL. 18753/2024 IN

¶3

- W.P.(C) 16364/2023 SUNIL KUMAR S

¶4

..... Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Tapas Das, Adv.

¶6

versus

¶7

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

¶8

..... Respondents Through: Ms. Abha Malhotra, Sr. PC with Mr. Jitendra Kumar Tripathi, GP for UOI

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

% 14.05.2024

¶13

CM APPL. 18753/2024 (for early hearing)

¶14

This is an application filed by the petitioner seeking early hearing of the writ petition.

¶15

For the reasons stated in the application and the learned counsel for the respondents has no objection, the application is allowed. With the consent of the counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing today. Application is disposed of.

¶16

W.P.(C) 16364/2023

¶17

This petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:

¶18

“In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and in the

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/05/2024 at 11:53:22

¶21

interest of justice, it is therefore most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:

¶22

a) 1ssue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 26.09.2023 on merit as per the policy laid down by the DOPT posting him to the places Bikaner, Rishikesh, Chandigarh, Pathankot and Jammu with reference to 4 (iv) of DOPT Office Memorandum No. 28034/23/2004-Estt. (A) dated 23.08.2004 read with office memorandum F. No. 28034/9/2009- Estt. (A) dated 30.09.2009; b) issue direction not to damage the career prospect of the individual for seeking legal justice for ensuring fundamental rights;

¶23

c) issue certiorari quashing the letter dated 29 November 2023 in the matter of rejection of representation;

¶24

pass any other or further orders or directions in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.”

¶25

The claim of the petitioner is primarily that the petitioner be posted at one of the places, being Bikaner, Rishikesh, Chandigarh, Pathankot and Jammu as according to him, his wife is the Government of India employee and working in Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi. A reference is made to the DoP&T instructions dated August 23, 2004 and September 30, 2009.

¶26

Though, we have been informed that the request of the petitioner based on the DoP&T instructions has been considered by the respondents and rejected, since, the plea of posting at above places is being urged on compassionate ground, Ms. Abha Malhotra, learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing for the respondents on instructions submits that the respondents shall consider this petition as a representation on behalf of the petitioner for posting at one of the above places on compassionate ground.

¶27

Noting the submission made by Ms. Malhotra, the petition is disposed

¶28

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/05/2024 at 11:53:22

¶29

of directing the respondents to treat this petition as a representation on behalf of the petitioner for considering the posting at the above places on compassionate grounds, which according to Mr. Das have been urged in the petition, and decide the same within a period of six weeks from today as an outer limit and convey the decision to the petitioner.

¶30

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶31

The date already fixed, i.e., October 24, 2024 stands cancelled.

¶32

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

¶33

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J

¶34

MAY 14, 2024 /aky

¶35

This is a digitally signed order.

¶36

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/05/2024 at 11:53:22

Sunil Kumar S v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kumar S v. Union of India & Ors.

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

Naresh Mittal Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 43(6) Delhi & Ors.

Neelkanth Steel and Alloys Vs Asstt. Commissioner Ofincome Tax, Circle 49(1), & Ors.

Maa Jhandewali Co-Operative Urban Thrift and Credit Society Ltd. Vs the Registrar Co-Operative Societies, & Ors.

Modicare Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 14 New Delhi

Ram Chander Jain Vs Union of India and Anr.

Firoz Ahmad Vs State Bank of India and Anr.

Dhan Raj Dhwan (as Guardian of Devansh Dhawan) Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi Directorate of Education & Anr.

Softech International Private Limited Vs Union of India through Secretary & Ors.

Ashok Kumar Vs Director General Central Industrial Security Force & Ors.

Zonunthari Vs Director General, Cisf

Ashutosh Kumar Singh Vs Union of India & Anr.

Gagrish Kumar Vs Union of India & Anr.

Akash Kumar & Ors. Vs Union of India

Armugam M Vs Union of India and Ors. & Anr.