High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/25515/2021disposed of

Ravinder Malik v. Union Of India And Others

2021-12-15Mr. Justice Raj Mohan Singh3 pages

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 15.12.2021 Ravinder Malik -Petitioner

Versus

Union of India and others -Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH

Present:

Petitioner-in-person.

**** RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J. (Oral) Petitioner has preferred this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction especially in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to refund a sum of Rs.80,047/- to the petitioner along with interest w.e.f. 01.04.2020 till final realization of the amount. Petitioner-in-person submits that he was planning to visit MD Anderson Cancer Centre, Houston, Texas, US on 29.10.2019. His appointment was re-scheduled for 01.04.2020. Petitioner got his air ticket booked from respondent No.3 on 29.02.2020 in a sum of Rs.80,047/- vide Booking Reference No.Z0SHM bearing e-ticket No.0982133121124 for the flight AI-

-2101 and AI-102. The flight was scheduled to depart on 30.03.2020 from Delhi to New York and return ticket for 09.04.2020 which was scheduled from New York to Delhi. The flight was cancelled by respondent No.3 due to unprecedented situation arising out of pandemic COVID-19.

The respondent-department has already issued an office memorandum on 16.04.2020 in respect of refund of air fair during lockdown on account of suspension of domestic and international flights.

Petitioner has already approached respondent No.3 by way of e-mail. Respondent No.3 has also replied to the petitioner on 27.02.2021, intimating that refund has already been made on 03.03.2021.

Petitioner-in-person submits that he has not received the said amount so far. His legal notice dated 10.08.2021 has not been replied so far.

Notice of motion.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. N.K. Vashisht, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1. In view of nature of order which this Court proposes to pass, there is no necessity of calling upon response from the respondents at this stage, as no order prejudicial to the interest of any party is being passed.

-3This petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to take an appropriate decision on pending legal notice dated 10.08.2021 filed by the petitioner and decide the same in accordance with law preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 15.12.2021 (RAJ MOHAN SINGH) Jyoti Sharma JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No