← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/1881/2020

Jaswant Singh v. Union Of India & ORS

2020-02-18Hon'Ble Mr. Justice G.S.Sistani,Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani2 pages

$~63 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 1881/2020 JASWANT SINGH ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. A.K. Behera & Mr. K. Dutt, Advs.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through:

Mr.

Ajay Digpaul, CGSC with Mr.Sahaj Garg (G.P) & Mr. Soumava Karmakar, Adv. for R-1, 2 & 3/UOI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI

O R D E R

% 18.02.2020 CM APPL. No. 6613/2020 (exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 1881/2020 & CM APPL. No. 6612/2020 (interim direction) The petitioner is aggrieved by the observation made by the Central Administrative Tribunal ('Tribunal', for short) in order dated 10.02.2020, more particularly in the last para, which we reproduce below : "... We want to know the reasons for such deviation. For the present, the promotions ordered on the basis of the DPC held on 31.12.2019 shall be kept on hold as regards the applicant. The respondents shall explain as to why the direction as to publication of seniority list was not complied with by them, within two weeks.

Post on 28.02.2020"

2.

Mr. A.K. Behera, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by reason of the Tribunal's orders, the result of the DPC held on 31.12.2019 have been kept on hold.

3.

Issue notice.

4.

Mr. Ajay Digpaul, learned Central Government Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondents Nos. 1, 2 & 3. 5.

Counsel submits that the present petition is pre-mature since the O.A. is listed on 28.02.2020 before the Tribunal and has yet to be decided. 6.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have considered their submissions.

7.

Since the grounds raised in this writ petition are yet to be considered by the Tribunal on 28.02.2020, we dispose of the present petition with the observation that the Tribunal would consider the same on the said date. 8.

Needless to say, in case the petitioner is still aggrieved, he would be at liberty to seek such remedy as may be available to him, in accordance with law.

G.S.SISTANI, J.

ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J.

FEBRUARY 18, 2020/uj