Kirodi Mal vs Union Of India & Ors.
2012 Latest Caselaw 2487 Del

       *       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                       Date of Decision: 17.04.2012

+                       W.P.(C) No.6979/1999

Kirodi Mal                                       ...     Petitioner

                                 versus

Union of India & Ors.                            ...     Respondents

Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Petitioner      :     Mr.Kunal Juneja.
For Respondents         :     Dr.Ashwani Bhardwaj.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA

ANIL KUMAR, J.

*

The learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has no

instructions from the petitioner despite efforts made by him repeatedly.

The learned counsel for the respondents on instructions states

that the relief sought by the petitioner in the writ petition has already

been granted to him and he has relied on order dated 15th February,

2011, a copy of which is produced in Court.

By order dated 15th February, 2011 it had been ordered that

Sh.Kirodi Mal was recruited in CRPF based on educational certificate

issued by Central Board of Higher Education, Vachaspati Bhawan,

Uttam Nagar, New Delhi. After due verification, it had been found that

the aforesaid institution was not recognized. Therefore, the petitioner

was removed from service pursuant to the order of the Disciplinary

Authority.

The order of the Disciplinary Authority was, however, set aside by

order dated 24th December, 2010 and the petitioner has been reinstated

in service with immediate effect with all consequential benefits

including continuity in service, benefits of seniority and notional

promotion from the date of the promotion of his immediate juniors was

granted to him. The petitioner has also been granted full back wages as

were granted to Sh.Nek Mohammad who was similarly placed.

The order dated 15th February, 2011 further states that on

reinstatement the petitioner has been allotted to his unit and directed

by the IGP SPL Sector to report to the Commandant of the concerned

unit and join his duties within one month.

In view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the

respondents and the copy of the office order dated 15th February, 2011

produced in the Court, the writ petition has become infructuous.

Consequently, the writ petition is disposed of as infructuous.

Parties are left to bear their own cost.

ANIL KUMAR, J.

SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.

APRIL 17, 2012 'k'