Ajay Kuamr Singh v. Union Of India And ANR.
$~A-9,10,11,14,15,16&19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P. (C) 8199/2019 BISWAJIT ROY .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. K B Upadhyay, Advocate.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR .....Respondents Through:
Ms. Suman Chauhan, Advocate.
Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocate for UOI.
+ W.P. (C) 9287/2020, CM APPL. 29956/2020 BHAGIRATH .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. K B Upadhyay, Advocate.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. Arnav Kumar, Senior Panel (UOI).
Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocate for UOI.
+ W.P. (C) 10790/2019, CM APPL. 44578/2019 KAVENDRA SINGH .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.
.....Respondents Through:
Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocate for UOI.
+ W.P. (C) 12925/2019, CM APPL. 52736/2019 ALOK PATEL .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. K B Upadhyay, Advocate.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
.....Respondents W.P.(C) 8199/2019 and other connected matters Page 1 of 4
Through:
Mr. Jitendra Kumar Tripathi, Advocate with Mr. Suraj Kumar GP.
Mr. Kamal Kant Jha and Ms. Sheetal Raghuvanshi, Advocates.
Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocate for UOI.
+ W.P. (C) 12929/2019, CM APPL. 52740/2019 HARJEET SINGH .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. K B Upadhyay, Advocate.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. Kamal Kant Jha and Ms. Sheetal Raghuvanshi, Advocates.
Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocate for UOI.
+ W.P. (C) 12958/2019, CM APPL. 52829/2019 AMIT HANSDA .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. K B Upadhyay, Advocate.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. Kamal Kant Jha and Ms. Sheetal Raghuvanshi, Advocates.
Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocate for UOI.
+ W.P. (C) 218/2020, CM APPL. 691/2020 AJAY KUMAR SINGH .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. K B Upadhyay, Advocate.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. D S Mehandru, Advocate.
Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocate for UOI.
% Date of Decision: 01st March, 2021 W.P.(C) 8199/2019 and other connected matters Page 2 of 4
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ASHA MENON
J U D G M E N T
MANMOHAN, J (Oral) :
1.
The petitions have been heard by way of video conferencing. 2.
Present writ petitions have been filed challenging show cause notices issued by the respondent No. 3 (Sashastra Seema Bal). 3.
Learned counsel for the respondents raises preliminary objections to the maintainability of the present writ petitions on the ground that they are premature as they assail only show cause notices. He further submits that in the event an adverse order is passed against the petitioners in pursuance to the show cause notices, the petitioners have alternative effective remedy of filing statutory appeals under Rule 29 of the Sashastra Seema Bal Rules, 2009.
4.
In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioners states that he would be satisfied in the event this Court were to direct that if termination orders are passed in pursuance to the impugned show cause notices, the same shall not be given effect to for a period of two weeks, so that the petitioner can avail of the statutory remedy. 5.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court directs that the respondents shall pass a reasoned order disposing of the show cause notices within two weeks. However, in the event the services of the petitioners are terminated, then the said order shall not be given effect to for two weeks, during which time, the petitioners shall be at liberty to file statutory appeals under Rule 29 of Shasatra Seema Bal Rules, 2009. This W.P.(C) 8199/2019 and other connected matters Page 3 of 4
Court clarifies that it has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the controversy. All the rights and contentions of the parties are left open. 6.
With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petitions along with pending applications stand disposed of. Interim orders, if any, stand vacated. 7.
The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. Copy of the order be also forwarded to the learned counsel through e-mail. MANMOHAN, J ASHA MENON, J MARCH 01, 2021 TS W.P.(C) 8199/2019 and other connected matters Page 4 of 4