Chitrasen Pathak v. Union Of India & ORS

$~24 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 6118/2016 CHITRASEN PATHAK ..... Petitioner Represented by:

Mr.Kedar Nath, Tripathy, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by:

Mr.B.S.Shukla, CGSC with Ms.Priti, Advocate

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI

O R D E R

% 20.07.2016 1.

The petitioner is in low medical category.

He is currently in Chandigarh. He has been transferred to Jodhpur. Learned counsel for the respondents states that the same sedentary duty which was being taken from the petitioner at Chandigarh would be assigned to the petitioner at Jodhpur. 2.

We have seen the original medical papers produced by the petitioner which show that as and when the cervical spondylosis from which the petitioner suffers aggravates he is administered heat therapy, which is available at Jodhpur. The infirmity of the petitioner is of a kind which does not require any specialized treatment. The treatment for reducing the pain as and when it surfaces is available at Jodhpur. 3.

Noting that ITBP has very few peace stations, we dismiss the writ petition for the reason such force personnel are kept at Chandigarh where either they or their immediate family members required super speciality W.P.(C) No.6118/2016

treatment at either AIIMS or PGIMER. We therefore decline to interfere with the transfer order noting that the petitioner has been at Chandigarh since the year 2009.

4.

The petitioner is issued a fresh movement order directing him to report to Jodhpur and present himself to the Commandant of the 42nd Bn. ITBP, to which battalion the petitioner has been attached. 5.

No costs.

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

PRATIBHA RANI, J.

JULY 20, 2016 mamta W.P.(C) No.6118/2016