Prem Singh Rajput v. Union Of India

^3 Signed By:RAM DATT Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing.

$-9, 10, 12, *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.rCI 4043/2017 and CM No. 17791/2017 RAM SHARAN Petitioner Through: Ms Zubeda Begum, Ms Sana Ansari and Ms Vaishali Tanwar, Advocates.

versus UNION OF INDIA Respondent Through: Mr Sandeep Mahapatra, Advocate.

WITH + W.P.fCI 4044/2017 and CM No. 17793/2017 RATI RAM Petitioner Through: Ms Zubeda Begum, Ms Sana Ansari and Ms Vaishali Tanwar, Advocates.

versus UNION OF INDIA Respondent Through: Mr Sandeep Mahapatra, Advocate.

WITH + W.PTCI 4046/2017 and CM No. 17797/2017 PREM SINGH RAJPUT Petitioner Through: Ms Zubeda Begum, Ms Sana Ansari and Ms Vaishali Tanwar, Advocates.

versus UNION OF INDIA Respondent Through: Mr Sandeep Mahapatra, Advocate.

/ WITH y W.P.(0 4047/2017 and CM No. 17799/2017 SHYAM SUNDER Petitioner Through: Ms Zubeda Begum, Ms Sana Ansari and Ms Vaishali Tanwar, Advocates.

versus UNION OF INDIA Respondent Through:

Mr Sandeep Mahapatra, Advocate.

AND + W.P.(C) 4343/2017 and CM No. 18944/2017 RAMDHAN ..... Petitioner Through: Ms Zubeda Begum, Ms Sana Ansari

?

and Ms Vaishali Tanwar, Advocates.

versus UNION OF INDIA Respondent Through: Mr Sandeep Mahapatra, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

ORDER

% 09.08.2017 1.

The learned counsel for the respondent states that the petitioners in these petitions have been offered flats in R.K. Puram as desired by them. 2.

In view of the above, no further orders are required to be passed in these petitions, however, it must be mentioned that some of the petitioners have other problems, which make it difficult for them to occupy flats located on higher floors. In the circumstances it is clarified that the petitioners would be at liberty to approach the respondent and if it is feasible, within the frame work of the current policy, to address the said requirement, the respondent shall do so. However, no interference from this Court is called for on this count.

3.

It is seen that the petitioners have been offered suitable accommodation albeit at a considerable distance from where they currently stay. Thus, the petitioners would necessarily have to make a choice whether they want to reside in the area of their choice or be accommodated at lower floors in other areas.

4.

If the petitioners are entitled to shifting allowance, the same would not be withheld by the respondent.

/ Q?

5.

The petitions and pending applications are disposed of with the aforesaid directions.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J AUGUST 09, 2017 RK