Subhash And ANR v. Union Of India And ORS

$~9 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 5694/2016 SUBHASH AND ANR ..... Petitioners Through Mr.P.Sureshan, Adv.

versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through Ms.Sangita Rai, Adv. CGSC, Ms.

Sunila Singh and Mr. Pradeep Singh Tomar, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI

O R D E R

% 20.06.2016 C.M.Nos.23543-44/2016 Allowed subject to all just exceptions.

The applications stand disposed of.

W.P.(C) 5694/2016 The petitioners being husband and wife who are working for the CISF are aggrieved by the communication dated 19th May, 2016 by which their request for permission to reside outside the campus has been declined. The petitioners submit that the petitioner no. 2 is on the family way and there are various constraints in residing in the campus including the constraint of proper food, congenial environment and the appropriate diet required for a woman who is on the family way. Counsel further submits that no reasons

have been given for declining the request whereas in the past such requests have been acceded to.

Learned counsel for the respondent who enters appearance on an advance notice submits that the present petition is premature as the representation of the petitioner is pending.

She further submits that the representation would be decided within ten days from today positively. Heard.

We expect that the request of the petitioners would be considered sympathetically and in accordance with law within ten days from today. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner wishes to withdraw this petition with leave to file fresh petition in accordance with law if the representation is rejected.

Copy of the order be given dasti to the parties. G.S.SISTANI (VACATION JUDGE) P.S.TEJI (VACATION JUDGE) JUNE 20, 2016 mr