Amrendra Kumar Yadav v. Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16322 of 2021 ====================================================== Amrendra Kumar Yadav Son of Bhagawan Prasad Jaipalpatti, P.S. Madhepura, District Madhepura.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

Union of India through the Ministry of Defence New Delhi. 2.

Director General of Medical Service (ARMY) DGMS Integrated Headquarters, Ministry of Defence, Adjutant General Branch, L Block, New Delhi.

3.

Brigadier, M.H. Wellington (Niligiris) Dakshin Bharat Areas Tamil Nadu. 4.

Registrar Cum Colonel Record M.H. Wellington (Niligiris) Dakshin Bharat Areas, Tamil Nadu.

5.

Senior Registrar Cum Lieutenant General Army medical Corps Record Office (A.M.C. RECORD) Lucknow, Utter Pradesh. 6.

Officer in Chief, A.M.C. Record Lucknow.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dinesh Prasad Verma, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Dr. K. N. Singh, ASG Mr.Ram Tajubh Singh, Adv.

Mr.Radhika Raman, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 24-01-2024

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief(s):- "1. That this writ petition is being filed by the petitioner in the nature of Certiorari to quash the originated massage ID 161 dated 17 may 2021 singed by brigadier records A.M.C. records, M.H. Wellington, communicated by the A.M.C. Records Lucknow, by which respondents have not accepted the earlier order communication dt. 15. April 2021 issued from M.H. Wellington A.M.C. Record. By this order appellant has been upgraded in shape-1

Patna High Court CWJC No.16322 of 2021(2) dt.24-01-2024 2/2 category and recommended for extension of service of the applicant from 2022 to 2024. Further be pleased to direct the respondent to increase the length of service (retirement) from 2022 to 2024 (Army Medical Board) himself declared the petitioner that he is in the SHAPE -1 category."

2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks not to press the present writ petition, however, seeks liberty on behalf of the petitioner to avail such other alternative remedies as are otherwise available under the law, for redressal of his aforesaid grievances. Liberty so sought is granted.

3. The writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) sonal/- U