Amit Kumar v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18720 of 2016 ====================================================== Amit Kumar, son of Mrityuvan Singh, r/o Village Simari, PO Nima Budhaul, PS Amas, District Gaya ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1. The Union Of India through the Directorate General, Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) Block No. 1, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi

2. Inspector General of Police (IGP) Chhatisgarh Sector, Headquarter, CRPF Old Hidyatullah, National Law University, Near PHQ, Raipur, Chhatisgarh

3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police (DIG) CRPF Range, Jagdalpur, Chhatisgarh

4. The Commandant, 02, CRPF, Sabri Nagar, Sukma, Chhatisgargh ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arun Kumar For the Respondent/s :

Mr.S.D Sanjay Addl. Soc. Gen.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 21-02-2019 I.A. No. 1 of 2019 has been filed by the respondent Union of India placing on record their stand that in light of this Court's earlier order dated 23.1.2019. The issue is being examined by the authorities. The Union of India has prayed for twelve weeks' time to enable them to resolve the issue arising out of order dated 23.1.2019.

The relevant extract of the order dated 23.1.2019 is being reproduced herein:- "If there is no consideration till date this Court would observe that the authorities would be well advised to consider his claim in light of Clause 3 d of the report dated 26.6.2013 (Annexure 2) as the same suggest that the petitioner has incurred some injury7

Patna High Court CWJC No.18720 of 2016(7) dt.21-02-2019 2/2 during course of his basic training and his claim of disability in terms of the existing provision was required to be considered."

This writ petition, in view of the stand taken by the respondent authorities, is being disposed of by recording that the final decision regarding petitioner's claim in light of Clause 3(d) as per report dated 26.6.2013 should be taken by the authorities as per their undertaking within twelve weeks from today and a reasoned and speaking to this extent be communicated to the petitioner.

In view of the aforesaid development during pendency of the writ petition, since the petitioner's claim for disability benefits is being looked into by the authorities themselves no useful purpose is going to be served by keeping this writ petition pending.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. (Madhuresh Prasad, J) SNkumar/- U