Milind Bhosale And ORS v. Union Of India Through Ministry Of Defence And ORS

901 wpst 1006-20.doc Pradnya Bhogale

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION ST. NO. 1006 OF 2020 Milind Bhosale and Ors.

..Petitioners vs.

Union of India and Ors.

..Respondents ...........

Mr. K.P. Anilkumar i/b. Mr. Amit Saple for Petitioners. Mr. R.R. Shetty for Respondents.

...........

CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR & M.S.KARNIK, JJ.

DATE : 22 JANUARY 2020 P.C.:- Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

The Petitioners have challenged the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 10 January 2020 in Original Application filed by the Petitioners. From the reading of the order dated 10 January 2020 it is clear that the Tribunal is yet to decide on the interim relief sought for by the Petitioner and what is rejected is an ad-interim relief. The application for interim relief would be considered by the Tribunal on 18 February 2020.

3.

It is not necessary for us to detail the facts of the controversy in view of the contention of the learned counsel for 1/2

901 wpst 1006-20.doc the Respondents. Learned counsel for the Respondents states that even though the policy has now been adopted, the representations of the Petitioners in respect of individual hardship, if any, would be considered before actually transferring them. In view of the fact that the matter is now kept before the Tribunal on 18 February 2020, the individual representations made by the Petitioners would be decided before 18 February 2020.

4.

The decision upon the representations will not be given effect till 18 February 2020.

5.

Learned counsel for the Petitioners contends that the High Court of Himachal Pradesh has granted interim stay to the impugned policy. The order of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh dated 8 January 2020 is annexed to the Petition. We note that the policy impugned in the Original Application is an all India Services Policy adopted by the Respondents and prima facie if a stay is granted by one High Court to the Central policy it would apply all over India. This aspect is open for the Petitioner to contend before the Tribunal. Recording the position as above, no further orders are necessary in this Petition. 6.

Writ Petition is disposed of.

(M.S.KARNIK, J.) (NITIN JAMDAR, J.) 2/2