Sadan Kumar Sharma v. Union Of India And ORS

$~106 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 4173/2024 SADAN KUMAR SHARMA ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Utkarsh Singh and Mr. Kartik Sahrma, Advocates

Versus

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through:

Ms. Monika Arora, CGSC with Mr. Subhrodeep Saha and Ms. Jyoti Tiwari, Advs. for UOI Mr. Ginny J. Rautray, Mr. Navdeep Singh, Mr. Ranvijay Singh and Ms. Devika Thakur, Advs. for R-3/JNU

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR O R D E R (ORAL) % 23.04.2024 W.P.(C) 4173/2024 1.

Ms. Ginny J. Rautray, learned Counsel for Respondent 3 makes a statement on instructions that the impugned rejection of the petitioner's request for extension of four semesters was based on UGC Regulations 2009 and that, on a reconsideration, the University is now convinced that the petitioner's case would have to be considered as per the UGC Regulations 2016.

She submits that the university is willing to grant the petitioner the extension as is available under the UGC Regulations 2016.

2.

In that view of the matter, Mr. Utkarsh Singh on instructions KUMAR 12:49:10 By:CHANDRASHEKHARAN HARI SHANKAR 12:47:46 W.P.(C) 4173/2024

does not seek to continue to press this petition any further. The statement of Ms. Rautray is recorded.

The university shall remain bound by it. Needless to say, the university would adopt a proactive stand and grant the petitioner extension to which the petitioner is entitled as per the UGC Regulations 2016 without compelling the petitioner to knock on the doors of this court once again. 3.

The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 4.

Till the decision is taken on the petitioner's representation, he would not be dispossessed from the hostel, which is presently in his occupation.

CM APPL. 17093/2024 5.

The application does not survive for consideration and stands disposed of.

C.HARI SHANKAR, J APRIL 23, 2024 rb Click here to check corrigendum, if any KUMAR 12:49:10 By:CHANDRASHEKHARAN HARI SHANKAR 12:47:46 W.P.(C) 4173/2024