Delhi High Court
Union Of India vs Dr.Lakshman Das & Anr. on 16 September, 2010
Author: Mool Chand Garg
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P. (C.) No. 12554/2004
% Date of Reserve: 13.09.2010
Date of Decision: 16.09.2010
UNION OF INDIA .... Petitioner
Through Ms.Geeta Sharma, Adv.
Versus
DR.LAKSHMAN DAS & ANR .... Respondents
Through Mr.S.S.Tiwari, Adv.
+ W.P. (C.) No. 1304/2003
DR.LAKSHMAN DAS .... Petitioner
Through Mr.S.S.Tiwari, Adv.
Versus
UOI & ORS. .... Respondents
Through Ms.Geeta Sharma, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOOL CHAND GARG
1. Whether reporters of Local papers may be
allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporter or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in
the Digest?
MOOL CHAND GARG, J.
*
1. It may be observed here that Dr.Lakshman initially filed OA
No.405/2000 contending that his date of promotion to Special Grade I
should be antedated and reckoned from 04.02.1990. The said OA
W.P.(C.) Nos. 12554/2004 & 1304/2003 Page 1 of 16
was disposed of with directions given to Union of India to consider the
claim of Dr.Lakshman. The claim was rejected by Union of India vide
OM dated 11.06.2002. Being aggrieved by the said OM Dr.Lakshman
filed OA No.3337/2002 which was allowed by the Tribunal vide order
dated 03.10.2003. It is against this order Union of India has field
W.P.(C) No.12554/2004.
2. On the other hand Dr. Lakshman despite an order passed by the
Tribunal dated 28.01.2002 in OA No.405/2000 has filed W.P.(C)
No.1304/2003 with the following prayers:-
"(i) Set aside and quash para 9 & 10 of the impugned
order dated 28.01.2002 passed in OA No.405/2000 as well
as para 2 of the order dated 11.07.91 so far as it relates to
the petitioner.
(ii) Direct the respondents to give placement to the
petitioner as Spl. Gr. II (NFSG) from due date and Spl.Gr.I
(NFSG) w.e.f. 01.12.1991 i.e. the date on which NFSG &
FSG were merged by the respondents
(iii) Direct the respondents to give all consequential
benefits accruing to the petitioner consequent to his
placement as Spl.Gr.II (NFSG) from due date i.e.
04.02.1990 on notional basis and subsequent promotions
including difference in pay/arrears etc w.e.f. 01.03.1994 on
wards.
(iv) Pass any other order/s as may be deemed just and
proper in the facts of the case so as to protect the
petitioner‟s batch seniority in the Non-teaching Specialists
sub-cadre of Central Health Service w.e.f. 04.02.1982."
3. The common facts relevant for the purpose of deciding both
these matters are, that Dr.Lakshman joined as Specialist Grade II in
Non-Teaching Specialist Sub Cadre in Neurosurgery w.e.f. 04.02.1982.
In 1989 Dr.Lakshman got a foreign assignment. On his request
President of India conveyed sanction vide letter dated 07.06.1989 for
his transfer on deputation to Saudi Arabia for a period of one year.
Some of the terms and conditions of the said letter dated 07.06.1989
are reproduced hereunder:
W.P.(C.) Nos. 12554/2004 & 1304/2003 Page 2 of 16
"No.A.35014/2/89-CHS.IV
Government of India
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare
(Department of Health)
New Delhi, dated 7th June 1989
To
The Medical Superintendent,
Safdarjang Hospital,
New Delhi,
Subject: Terms and conditions of foreign assignment
abroad relating to Dr.Lakshman Das, Neuro-
surgeon, Safdarjang Hospital, New Delhi.
Sir,
I am directed to convey the sanction of the President
to the transfer on deputation of Dr.Lakshman Das,
Neurosurgeon, Safdarjang Hospital, New Delhi on foreign
service in Saudi Arabia for a period of one year on the
following terms:-
(i) During the period of his foreign service Dr. Lakshman
Das will receive, from the Razayat Company Limited
monthly salary at the rate of 12,000/- Saudi Riyals (S.R.).
(ii) The Razayat Company Ltd. of Saudi Arabia will
intimate to the Ministry of health & Family Welfare, Govt.
of India whether during the period of his foreign service
Dr.Lakshman Das will or will not be liable to income tax.
National income tax, if levied will be paid by Dr. Das. He
will also pay income tax if levied by the Govt. of India on
his earnings in Saudi Arabia.
(iii) He will be paid by the Razayat Company Limited in
Saudi Arabia travelling allowances for his journey to take
up the assignment and to return therefrom, as well as the
journey if any, in connection with his work in Saudi Arabia.
Travelling allowances (both ways for the family of the
officer will also be paid by the Razayat Company Limited of
Saudi Arabia.
(iv) The joining time pay of Dr.Lakshman Das when
proceeding on foreign service and on reversion therefrom
shall be payable by the Razayat Company Ltd. of Saudi
Arabia.
W.P.(C.) Nos. 12554/2004 & 1304/2003 Page 3 of 16
(v) The leave of Dr.Lakshman Das during the period of
foreign service shall be regulated under the rules of the
foreign employer. The leave salary in respect of leave
granted by the foreign employer will also be paid by him
and the leave will not be debited against the Government
servant‟s leave account. The period of foreign service will
not count towards leave under the Government of India.
(vi) The Govt. of India will not be liable to pay leave
emoluments in respect of any special disability leave
granted to Dr Lakshman Das on account of any disability
incurred in any through foreign service under Razayat
Company Limited in Saudi Arabia even if such disability
manifests itself after the termination of service under
Razayat Company Limited in Saudi Arabia.
(vii) The service of Dr.Lakshman Das in Razayat Company
Limited in Saudi Arabia will be pensionable subject to
payment of pension contribution by him at the prescribed
rates. After completion of his resident service contract
satisfactorily, Dr.Lakhsman Das will be eligible to receive
gratuity as admissible according to the rules in Saudi
Arabia. The gratuity will be paid in rupees in India on
rejoining Govt. of India service after expiry of foreign
service in Saudi Arabia and it will be credited to the G.P.
Fund account of the officer and will form part of the
accumulation to his G.P.Fund.
(viii) Dr.Lakshman Das shall pay to the Govt. of India
pension contribution in respect of service rendered by him
in Saudi Arabia and pension contribution shall be @ ` 792/-
per month. These rates are provisional and the final rates
of pension contribution will be determined by the Pay &
Accounts Officer (Sectt.), Ministry of Health and Family
Welfare, New Delhi according to the length of service of
this doctor.
(ix) Dr.Lakshman Das shall pay to the Govt. of India in
the currency in which the salary is paid to him, the pension
contribution in respect of the service rendered by him in
Saudi Arabia, as determined by the Pay Accounts Office
concerned according to the orders in force from time to
time on the basis of the length of service of the officer.
(x) The amount of pension contributions are to be
remitted to the Pay & Accounts officer (Sectt.), Ministry of
W.P.(C.) Nos. 12554/2004 & 1304/2003 Page 4 of 16
Health and Family Welfare, Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi
within 15 days of the end of the month of drawing pay and
credited under the following Head of Account "XLIV -
Central Receipts in aid of Superannuation Contributions for
pension and gratuities". The pension contributions should
be paid promptly subject to adjustments and alterations in
accordance with final rates as may be necessary after
intimation of final rates by the Accounts Officer. Penal
interest would be levied if payments are delayed.
(xi) The Razayat Company Limited in Saudi Arabia shall
afford to Dr.Lakshman Das medical facilities as may be
provided by the foreign employer. He will not be entitled
to claim reimbursement of any medical expenses that
might be incurred by him on his own treatment or the
member of his family during the period of foreign service,
from the Govt. of India.
(xii) The period of deputation of Dr.Lakshman Das will
commence form the date of relinquishing charge of his
post in India and end on the date of resuming charge of the
post under the Govt. of India.
(xiii) Residential accommodation will be provided by the
foreign employer on terms and conditions prescribed by
them
(xiv) During the period of foreign service Dr.Lakshman
Das will continue to subscribed to the Provident Fund and
Central Govt. Employees Insurance Scheme to which he is
subscribing at the time of proceeding on foreign service, in
accordance with the Rules and repay the outstanding
loans, advances, if any, in the foreign currency in which the
salary is paid to him.
(xv) In order to facilitate timely remittance of pension
contributions, G.P.F. contributions and contributions
towards compulsory Group Insurance scheme, and
repayment of outstanding loans, advances, etc.,
Dr.Lakshman Das before proceeding abroad shall made
standing arrangements with his local bankers in India
whereby the bankers would arrange to remit to the Pay &
Accounts Officer (Sectt.), Minsitry of Health & FW, Nirman
Bhavan, New Delhi payment out of „Non-resident" Bank
Account operated for this purpose in rupees during the
period of foreign service within Saudi Arabia. It would be
the responsibility of Dr.Lakshman Das to ensure that
W.P.(C.) Nos. 12554/2004 & 1304/2003 Page 5 of 16
remittance in foreign currency to cover these payments
are arranged by him at least once a year and that he would
produce the requisite certificate about the remittance in
foreign exchange to cover these payments from the „Non-
Resident‟ account to the Pay & Accounts Office (Sectt.).
The exchange rates applicable will be official accounting
rate at the time of actual remittances in foreign exchange
are arranged by Dr.Das.
(xvi) Dr.Lakshman Das will not be allowed to enter into
any contract for extension of his assignment in Saudi
Arabia without prior permission of the Govt. of India. In
case the Razayat Company Limited in Saudi Arabia require
his services beyond the period of present contract of one
year, he should intimate this fact to the Govt. of India
(Ministry of External Affairs, Economic Division and Ministry
of Health & Family Welfare, New Delhi) as soon as it comes
to his notice and also request the foreign Govt. to take up
the matter with the India‟s representative in that country.
In no case Dr. Das should stay in beyond the period of
contract without prior permission of the Govt. of India. He
will also not be allowed to resign during his stay abroad.
(xvii) The Govt. of India will not be liable for any
extraordinary pension under the „Extra-ordinary pension
scheme‟.
(xviii) If his deputation term is not extended it will be his
responsibility to ensure that he returns to India
immediately on expiry of his term. It should also be his
personal responsibility to initiate correspondence with his
parent department for his return at least six months prior
to the expiry of deputation term. He should also ensure
that any request from the Razayat Company Ltd. in Saudi
Arabia for extension of his period of deputation beyond one
year, should be forwarded by the concerned Indian Mission
in Saudi Arabia at least six months before the expiry of the
deputation period.
(xix) Dr.Lakshman Das should note that if he fails to fulfil
the above obligations on his part, his continued stay
outside India after the expiry of sanctioned term, shall be
regarded as a deliberate act for which he shall be
personally held responsible and which may entail
institution of disciplinary action against him.
W.P.(C.) Nos. 12554/2004 & 1304/2003 Page 6 of 16
(xx) The date on which Dr.Lakshman Das is released may
be intimated to the Ministry of External Affairs (Economic
Division) Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi and the Indian Mission
in the Country of Saudi Arabia and this Ministry.
(xxi) Dr.Lakshman Das should register immediately with
the Mission on arrival in the country of Saudi Arabia ad
intimate his residential as well as official address in Saudi
Arabia for future correspondence, if any.
(xxii) It is, however, made clear that Dr.Lakshman Das
should be relieved of his duty only after his passage is
booked by the foreign company and necessary pre-
departure formalities are completed.
Yours faithfully,
(P.K.Kapur)
Under Secretary to GOI."
4. The period of deputation of Dr.Lakshman was extended from
time to time by various letters placed on record by Dr. Lakshman
dated 21.08.1990, 28.08.1991, 26.12.1991, 08.02.1993 and
25.02.1994.
5. According to Dr.Lakshman instructions dated 29.01.1988 and
20.06.1991 were issued by the second respondent to the effect, that
the person who goes on foreign assignment would retain his lien in
public interest and his seniority in the cadre shall be maintained.
These instructions are reproduced for the sake of reference:-
RELEVANT EXTRACT OF DOPT MEMO DATED
29.01.1988
External Affairs beers the salary and other expenses of
such persons.
6.7 No person who-
(i) is on assignment under the Indian Technical and
Economic Cooperation (ITE) Programme of the
Ministry of External Affairs and other Aid
Programmes;
W.P.(C.) Nos. 12554/2004 & 1304/2003 Page 7 of 16
(ii) is posted abroad in a foreign based office of a
Ministry/Department;
(iii)goes on a specific contract assignment to a foreign
Government
Should be allowed to retire voluntarily unless, after having
been transferred to India, he has resumed the charge of
the post in India and served for a period of not less than
one year;
(a) This restriction will, however, not be applicable in
case of officers who are on deputation to UN/International
organizations.
6.8 Since deputation of Indian officials abroad
contributes to mutual goodwill and understanding between
Indian and the foreign country concerned, it would be
largely in public interest if, as a rule, the lien of a
Government or semi Government employee selected for a
foreign assignment on the basis of sponsorship of the Govt.
of India is retained.
6.9. The State Governments are advised that their
employees may be released for service abroad on foreign
service terms in the public interest, after retaining the
applicant‟s lien and protecting his seniority. However, the
State Governments may allow their employees to go
abroad in accordance with the rules which are in force and
applicable to the employees concerned.
6.10 An expert who backs out after being selected for an
ITEC assignment will stand debarred from being considered
for any foreign assignment for a period of 3 years
thereafter.
7. This order will take effect from the date of issue. All
those who are on foreign assignment at present shall be
governed by the provisions of this order in respect of
proposals for extension of their tenure of deputation etc.
8. Hindi version of this letter will follow;
Yours faithfully,
(Smt. R.P.K.Kohli
Under Secretary to GOI
W.P.(C.) Nos. 12554/2004 & 1304/2003 Page 8 of 16
6. It was therefore pleaded that Dr.Lakshman was entitled to
protection of seniority in the Non-Teaching Specialist Cadre of Central
Health Services during the period of his remaining on deputation in
Saudi Arabia. In the letter dated 11.07.1991 the Union of India
considered Dr.Lakshman in the cadre and granted him promotion also
which it is stated by Dr.Lakshman reflects upon the stand of the Union
of India that he was on deputation in Saudi Arabia. The said letter is
reproduced hereunder:
No.A.32012/21/90-CHS IV
Government of India
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare
(Department of Health
New Delhi, dated 11th July, 1991
ORDER
The President is pleased to place the following
Specialist Grade II (Senior Scale) Officers of the Non-
Teaching Specialist Sub-Cadre of the Central Health
Service in the Specialist Grade II (NFSG) in the pay scale of
` 4500-5700 in their respective specialities w.e.f. the date
mentioned against their names.
S.No. Name of officer & design Instt. Where working Date from
Which
Placement
Effective
14. Dr.Lakshman Das,
Neurosurgeon on foreign assignment --
In Saudi Arabia w.e.f
10.06.1989."
2. In the event of an officer, who is placed in the above
mentioned selection Grade, being on study leave/other
kind of leave etc., deputation on foreign assignment, the
placement orders will take effect from the date he/she
resumes the charge of the post on completion of his/her
leave/deputation on foreign assignment.
3. In case any officer is or has been on unauthorized
absence during the past eight years, he/she may not be
placed in the scale of `4500-5700 till a decision on his/her
unauthorized absence is taken the details of such cases
may please be reported to this Ministry. (from 20.7.1987
to 28.7.1987) cannot be counted as unauthorized absence
since this period has been treated as dies-non.
4. Further in case of officers who were/are on
training/fellowship etc., certified to be in public interest
and are treated as on duty during the said period of
training/fellowship their placement will take effect from the
date indicated against their names.
5. The date on which these officers assume charge of
the post in non-functional Selection Grade (`4500-5700)
may please be intimated to this Ministry."
7. Dr.Lakshman pleaded before the Tribunal that despite the
terms and conditions of his deputation dated 07.06.1989 and
instructions dated 29.01.1988 & 20.06.1991 the Union of India
deprived him of his placement as a Specialist Grade II NFSG w.e.f.
04.02.1990 and as Specialist Grade I NFSG w.e.f. 01.12.1991. Even
though his deputation to Saudi Arabia was under the aegis of
respondents in public interest and as such he could not have been
made to suffer on account of his being on deputation especially when
he was recommended for promotion it was pleaded that all other
colleagues of the petitioner were given as Specialist NSG Grade II
after completion of 8 years of service as Specialist Grade II and then
as Specialist Grade I NFSG w.e.f. 01.12.1991 but he was discriminated
against.
8. As stated above Union of India vide order dated 11.06.2002
rejected the claim of the petitioner for grant of NFSG w.e.f.
01.12.1991 on the ground that foreign assignment of the petitioner
was on his own volition and cannot be treated in public interest. It
was also pleaded that in case Dr.Lakshman would be granted any
benefit then in many other cases similar benefits would have to be
granted by reviewing similar cases like that of Dr.A.K. Rai where the
OA was dismissed. It was also pleaded that the case of Dr.Lakshman
was covered by OM dated 22.11.1990 as per instructions of foreign
assignment dated 29.06.1991. The OM dated 22.11.1990 (Annexure
I) reads as under:
"D.P.T., OM No.22038/1/86-Estt.(D)
Dated 22.11.1990
Selection Grade in Group 'A' Services - Grant of
NBR for NFSG appointments
The undersigned is directed to refer to this
Department‟s O.M. of even number, dated 9th October,
1989 (SI No.45 of Swamy‟s Annual, 1989), laying down the
procedure and criteria to be followed for appointment to
Non-functional Selection Grade (NFSG) in organized Group
„A‟ Central Services. In this connection, it has now been
decided to follow the procedure indicated below in respect
of extending the benefit of Next Below Rule (NBR) for NFSG
appointments and also the sealed cover cases-
(a) In the case of promotion to NFSG, there is no need to
extend the select list beyond the actual number of
selection Grade vacancies even when any of the officers
included in the select list remains on deputation. Since
there is no functional need to fill the vacancy created by
some one being away on deputation. Though the junior is
not thus promoted to fill the NFSG vacancy, there should,
however, be no objection to allow pro forma promotion, as
a special case, to an official included in the select list while
he is on deputation in public interest, without insisting on
the normal condition of NBR.
(b) As regards sealed cover cases, if the
recommendations in respect of a person for appointment
to NFSG are kept in the sealed cover, the NFSG vacancy
should be kept unfilled till the disciplinary proceedings are
completed. In such cases, it is not permissible for a junior
person to officiate in the vacancy. In the meantime, the
post will only be operated at JAG level. If on finalization of
the disciplinary proceedings, the officer is fully exonerated,
he will be entitled for promotion to the NFSG from the date
from which it was due and also for arrears of pay on that
account.
2. These instructions may please be brought to the
notice of all concerned for guidance and compliance."
9. The order passed by Union of India dated 11.06.2002 has been
assailed by Dr.Lakshman in OA No.3337/2002 which was allowed vide
order dated 03.10.2003 whereby the Tribunal gave directions to grant
notional benefit to Dr.Lakshman inter alia by holding that:
"The question that arises for consideration is that
whether the foreign assignment of the respondent was in
public interest since the claim of the respondent was
rejected on the pretext that he had proceeded on the
assignment on his own volition and it was not a case of
government sponsorship in public interest.
The deputation of Indian officials abroad contributes
to mutual goodwill and understanding between India and
the Foreign Country concerned and it recognizes that it
would be largely in public interest. Tribunal relied upon
Paragraph 4, 8 and 14.5 of the Instructions dated
29.06.1991 and Fundamental Rule 111.
The public interest vis-à-vis a Government servant
would normally be the interest of the Government. The
respondent in the instant case went to the assignment in
public interest keeping in view that the interest of the
Government is directly involved and keeping in view that
international relations with other countries is the subject of
public interest.
Dr.A.K.Rai Vs. UOI, OA No.993 of 2001, is not
relevant since in the said case Dr.AK Rai‟s junior had been
promoted before him but in the instant case no person
junior to the respondent was promoted."
10. The relief granted by the Tribunal to Dr.Lakshman in the
aforesaid OA is reproduced hereunder:
"11. Resultantly, we allow the application and quash the
impugned order and direct:-
(a) that the applicant would be entitled to placement in
the higher scale on completion of the required number of
years of service; and
(b) that if he was not serving in India and was on foreign
assignment, the notional benefit would be given to him but
not the arrears."
11. This order passed by the Tribunal is the subject matter of
W.P.(C) No.12554/2004 filed by Union of India. According to Union of
India the order passed by the Tribunal cannot be sustained inasmuch
as according to OM dated 22.01.1990 the case of Dr.Lakshman who
went on foreign deputation of his own volition is not covered and as
such he could not be kept at par with the case of those officers whose
assignments are covered by a Government sponsored programme in
public interest. It was also pleaded that provisions of Next Below Rule
as referred to in the OM as aforesaid was not applicable in the instant
case as no officer junior to Dr.Lakshman had been promoted to
Specialist Grade I before the date of his promotion. Thirdly, it was
stated that as per the promotion order dated 11.07.1991 the
promotion in respect of Office Memorandum will be effected on the
date on which such officers resumes duties after the return from
foreign assignment. The said order was not challenged and therefore
it has become final. It is therefore submitted that the order of the
Tribunal is liable to be set aside because even finding returned by the
Tribunal that Dr.Rai‟s case was not applicable in the instant case was
also not correct.
12. According to Dr.Lakshman, the contentions of UOI are not
sustainable inasmuch as, a bare reading of the sanction dated
07.06.1989 clarifies that the opportunity to work in Saudi Arabia had
a tacit approval of Union of India. In fact UOI vide letter dated
07.06.1989 has considered the joining of the service in Saudi Arabia
by Dr.Lakshman who was working as Neurosurgeon Safdarjung
Hospital, New Delhi as a deputation on foreign service in Saudi
Arabia for a period of 1 year which period was extended from time to
time.
13. Learned counsel appearing for Union of India states that
Dr.Lakshman joined the foreign service earlier and thereafter applied
for sanction and therefore it is not a case where it was a deputation in
public interest sanctioned by the Government of India. However,
reading the sanction letter dated 07.06.1989 does not support the
contentions of the learned counsel for the respondent.
14. Perusal of the aforesaid letter clearly establishes that even if
there was any lacunae on the part of Dr.Lakshman in having first
accepted the assignment and then applying for deputation the
deviations if any stands waived by the President of India. Moreover a
reading of the instructions of the Govt. of India as are available at
page 46 of W.P.(C) No.1304/2003, goes to show that in terms of the
bilateral arrangements between the developing countries
international assignments can be accepted by a Government
employee even on the basis of direct offer from an international
organization/foreign Government due to past work. Reference can be
made to paragraph 8 of the instructions which reads as under:
"8.METHODS OF SELECTION AND RELATED MATTERS:
The primary criteria for permitting a government
employee to undertake an assignment would be the
convenience of the Government in sparing him from the
point of view of the management of the service cadre to
which he belongs and exigency of public service.
8.1 subject to this overall condition, the Government and
public sector employees may secure international and
bilateral assignments through any of the following
methods:-
(i) nomination by the Government;
(ii) direct offer from an international organization/foreign
Government due to past work;
(iii) application made in response to open advertisement
following the prescribed procedure; and
(iv) by being picked up from the roster of an international
organization.
8.2 The Department of Personnel & Training, the cadre
controlling authority of various service cadres and the
nodal Ministries for the international organizations will deal
with various aspects relating to the nomination, selection
and appointment of the government employees to posts
under the international agencies and foreign Governments.
Each international agency is dealt with by a nodal Ministry,
for instance the Ministry of Labour looks after the
International Labour Organization (ILO), the Ministry of
Health liaises with the World Health Organization (WHO)
and the like."
15. The aforesaid document further goes to show that even if a
Government employee receives a direct offer from a foreign country
which have bilateral arrangements between the said Government and
the Govt. of India can certainly seek sanction of the Government for
his deputation.
16. As observed earlier, in the present case the sanction dated
07.06.1989 issued by the President of India clearly shows that the
services of Dr.Lakshman were transferred to Saudi Arabia on
deputation. In fact this is also clear from the letter dated 11.07.1991
as quoted above.
17. Insofar as the second requirement that is promotion of a junior
of Dr.Lakshman is concerned, the Union of India has not been able to
show us any seniority list prepared by them which may go to show
that there are any separate list for Specialist Grade I or Grade II which
may be relevant for the purpose of considering the issue of Next
Below Rule for the purpose of denying promotion to Dr.Lakshman.
18. Accordingly we are of the considered view that the order
passed by the Tribunal in this case does not suffer from any infirmity.
Consequently we dismiss writ petition filed by Union of India being
W.P.(C) No.12554/2004.
19. At the hearing of the two writ petitions, counsel for
Dr.Lakshman stated that if W.P.(C) No.12554/2004 filed by U.O.I. is
dismissed, W.P.(C) No.1304/2003 filed by Dr.Lakshman be treated as
withdrawn. Accordingly W.P.(C) No.1304/2003 is dismissed as
withdrawn.
20. No costs.
MOOL CHAND GARG, J.
SEPTEMBER 16, 2010 PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.
„ag‟
