Ramesh vs Union Of India

$~60
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                               Judgment delivered on: 04.05.2017

+        W.P.(C) 2349/2017

RAMESH                                                      ..... Petitioner

                             versus

UNION OF INDIA                                          ..... Respondent

Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Petitioner :         Ms Zubeda Begum and Ms Sana Ansari

For the Respondent :         Mr Sanjeev Narula, Mr Abhishek Ghai and Ms Anumita/


CORAM:-

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                                JUDGMENT

04.05.2017 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL) CM No.16406/2017(early hearing) For the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed. The petition is taken up for hearing today itself. The next date of 09.05.2017 is cancelled.

The application stands disposed of accordingly.

W.P. (C) 2349/2017 & CM No.10105/2017(interim direction)

1. Learned counsel for the respondent, under instructions, submits that all the ten flats, for which the petitioner had given preferences, stand allotted to employees, senior, in terms of date of joining of service, to the petitioner. He submits that seniority is counted from the date of joining service. He further submits that all the ten flats have been allotted to individuals, who had applied in the bidding cycle in the evening of 26.12.2016.

2. Learned counsel further submits that in view of the special facts and circumstances and in view of the request of the petitioner, the petitioner is being offered quarter No.2333 at Lodhi Road Complex, which is a Ground Floor quarter.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is agreeable to accept the offer.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the Quarter would be made habitable and the possession thereof will be offered to the petitioner within two weeks from today. His submission is taken on record.

5. With regard to the prayer for grant of relocation allowance, the petitioner is permitted to make an application. The respondent shall consider the application, if any, made by the petitioner for reimbursement of relocation expenses, keeping in view the peculiar WP(C) 2349/2017 Page 2 of 3 facts of the case, that the petitioner is being shifted on account of the re-development project and not because of his request.

6. Since this order has been passed in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the same shall not be treated as a precedent.

7. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to allot quarter No.2333 at Lodhi Road Complex to the petitioner.

8. Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J MAY 04, 2017 'Sn' WP(C) 2349/2017 Page 3 of 3