Vijay Sharma v. Directorate Of Estates Through The Estate Director And ORS

$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CONT.CAS(C) 360/2025 CM APPL. 14108/2025 VIJAY SHARMA .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Nikhil Beniwal, Ms. Shipra Bali and Ms. Riya Rana, Advs.

versus DIRECTORATE OF ESTATES THROUGH THE ESTATE DIRECTOR AND ORS .....Respondent Through:

Mr. Jatin Singh, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

O R D E R

% 15.05.2025 1.

Pursuant to the previous order, counsel for the respondent has handed up to the Court two communications dated 10th January 2025 and 20th February 2025.

2.

The representation of the petitioner with respect to the accommodation was rejected by order dated 10th January 2025 passed by the Deputy Secretary/G, Railway Board. It was stated in the said communication that the representation had been examined by the competent authority and the reasons for the rejection have been given. 3.

A second representation was made by the petitioner which was also considered and by communication dated 20th February 2025, it was stated that the reply of the Ministry of Railways dated 10th January 2025, still stands good.

4.

The petitioner, who is present in-person, states that he is a Joint 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 01/07/2025 at 01:18:06

Secretary level officer and the decision ought to be taken by the Minister of Railways.

5.

Counsel for the respondent, however, states that for individual cases, the competent authority is at the Secretary of the Railway Board but only for issues relating to a group of officers, the matter is escalated to the Minister. 6.

In any event, the order for which compliance is sought is dated 20th December 2024 passed by the Principal District & Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts in PPA No.13/2023 where direction had been given to file a representation and for it to be decided by the competent authority. 7.

The issues which the petitioner is canvassing relate to his eligibility for an accommodation and the illegality of the action taken by the Railways for evicting his family from the government accommodation, even though he was posted in North-East Frontier Railway ('NFR'). 8.

These are aspects which will have to be agitated by the petitioner in a requisite Writ Petition before any other competent Court. 9.

The petition is, therefore, disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner to canvass his grievances before a competent Court. 10.

The petitioner is also at liberty to revive the same, in case there is any continued infraction.

11.

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court. ANISH DAYAL, J MAY 15, 2025/MK/na 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 01/07/2025 at 01:18:06