W.P.(C)/4329/2018 of DEEPAK KUMAR Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS

Court: Delhi High Court
Decision date: 2018-05-30
Bench: R MIDHA
Case number: 4329/2018

Parties

DEEPAK KUMAR (PETITIONER)
UNION OF INDIA & ORS (RESPONDENT)

Cited by (1)

Counts citations resolved within this build's own ingested judgment corpus. The true corpus-wide count will be higher until more of the corpus is ingested.

W.P.(C)/1022/2013 of AJEET SINGH Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS (2013)

Cites (1)

W.P.(C)/3844/2021 of RASHI PERIPHERALS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS (2021)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all Body

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI% Date of Decision: 30[th] May, 2018

+ W.P.(C) 4329/2018 & CM No.16820-16821/2018

DEEPAK KUMAR

..... Petitioner

Through: Mr. Satish Kumar and Mr.Vishal Patel, Advs.

versus

UNION OF INDIA & ORS

..... Respondents

Through: Mr. J.K. Singh, Standing Counsel with Mr. Ranjeet Kumar and Ms. Madhulika Agarwal, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

1.The petitioner has challenged the impugned judgment dated 13[th]November, 2017 whereby the learned District Judge dismissed the petitioner’s appeal against the eviction order passed by the Estate Officer.

2.On 26[th] April, 2014, the petitioner was transferred from Delhi to Muzaffar Nagar. The petitioner retained the official quarter on the ground of sickness of his wife and made request for extension of the retention period on 20[th] June, 2014 and 17[th] September, 2014.

On 22[nd] September, 2014, the petitioner was transferred back to Delhi

whereupon the petitioner requested for regularisation of the accommodation retained by him. However, his request was rejected and the Estate Officer passed an eviction order which was challenged by the petitioner in the

authority.

4.This Court is of the view that the official accommodation of the petitioner should have been regularised when the petitioner was transferred back to Delhi. Vide order dated 27[th] April, 2018, this Court directed the matter to be placed before DGM (Law), Railways. Mr. J.K. Singh, learned Standing Counsel for railways has handed over the copy of the opinion of the DGM (Law) who has agreed with the view of this Court that the official accommodation of the petitioner should have been regularised when he was transferred back to Delhi.

5.The writ petition is allowed, impugned judgment dated 13[th]

November, 2017 passed by the District Judge as well as eviction order passed by the Estate Officer are hereby set aside and the official accommodation in occupation of the petitioner is hereby regularised. Pending applications are disposed of.

6.This Court appreciates the fair view taken by the DGM (Law) in this matter.

7.Copy of this judgment be given dasti to counsels for the parties under signature of Court Master.

MAY 24, 2018

J.R.MIDHA, J.