Rahul Kumar Meena vs Union Of India & Ors

                                      $~15

                                      *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                      %                                   Judgment delivered on: 08.09.2022

                                      +      W.P.(C) 13488/2019

                                      RAHUL KUMAR MEENA                                ..... Petitioner

                                                                 versus

                                      UNION OF INDIA & ORS                                  ..... Respondents
                                      Advocates who appeared in this case:
                                      For the Petitioner: Mr. Sudarshan Rajan, Mr. Hitain Bajaj, Mohd. Qamar Ali,
                                                          Advocates.
                                      For the Respondent: Mr. Mr. Ravi Prakash, CGSC with Mr. Farman Ali, Mohd.
                                                          Shahan Ulla and Ms. Shruti Sivakumar, Advocates.

                                      CORAM:-
                                      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
                                      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
                                                          JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the original application filed by the petitioner before the Hyderabad bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal has not been taken up for hearing for the last about four years for the reason that the Coram is not complete and the proceedings are getting delayed.

2. We observe that the subject petition impugns an order dated 30.08.2019 where transfer was sought from the Hyderabad bench to the Principal Bench at Delhi on the ground that petitioner has shifted Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KUNAL MAGGU Signing Date:10.09.2022 22:40:44 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.

his residence to Delhi. Said prayer was rejected by the Tribunal.

3. It is noticed that the plea that the Original Application is not being taken up because of lack of Coram was not raised in the original petition seeking transfer.

4. We are not inclined to interfere with the order dated 30.08.2019, however, since the plea of lack of Coram was not taken in the earlier proceedings, we grant liberty to the petitioner to approach the Chairman of the Central Administrative Tribunal afresh on the said ground.

5. The petition is accordingly disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner as aforesaid.

6. In case petitioner approaches the Chairman of Central Administrative Tribunal with a request for transfer, the same shall be considered without being influenced by the disposal of the present petition.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J SEPTEMBER 8, 2022 rk Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KUNAL MAGGU Signing Date:10.09.2022 22:40:44 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.