Sh.Vinod Kumar Dewangan vs Govt. Of India & Ors.
2012 Latest Caselaw 757 Del

*             IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                              WP(C) No.560/2012

%                         Date of Decision: 03.02.2012

Sh.Vinod Kumar Dewangan                                        .... Petitioner

                       Through Nemo


                                  Versus

Govt. of India & Ors.                                    .... Respondents

                       Through Mr.R.V.Sinha & Mr.R.N.Singh, Advocates

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R.MIDHA


ANIL KUMAR, J.

* A passover was prayed on behalf of learned counsel for the

petitioner.

After passover no one is present on behalf of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the respondents, Mr.R.V.Sinha, Advocate,

who appears on advance notice has produced a copy of the relieving

order dated 2nd February, 2012 stipulating that the petitioner of 2

BN/RPSF/Gorakhpur has been spared by the Company Commander

"D" Coy./2 BN/RPSF/Gorakhpur (now at Mohammadpur Khala, Distt.

Barabanki (U.P.) for U.P. Assembly Election) from 2

BN/RPSF/Gorakhpur to RPF/SECR/Bilaspur in the afternoon of

02.02.2012 vide Movement Order No.2 BN/D/T&P/17/2012-144.

A copy of the communication dated 2nd February, 2012 addressed

to the Standing Counsel for Railways, Mr.R.N.Singh, is produced which

is taken on record.

The plea of the petitioner is that after undergoing the training for

seven months, the petitioner was appointed as a Constable at RPSF and

was transferred to 2 BN, RPSF, Gorakhpur to SECR, RPF, Zone

Railways, Bilaspur. The petitioner further contended that by order

dated 3rd January, 2011, Senior Commandants/Commandant, 2 BN,

Railway Protection Special Force, Rajahi Camp, Gorakhpur, however,

directed that the petitioner should not be relieved since the petitioner is

under suspension. The petitioner has produced a copy of the final order

dated 11th January, 2011 imposing a punishment of withholding of his

increment for a period of two years with cumulative effect and his

suspension was also revoked with immediate effect. However, this

suspension period w.e.f. 13th August, 2010 to 11th January, 2011 was

directed to be treated as suspension.

In the circumstances, the only relief prayed by the petitioner was

to direct the respondents to issue relieving order to the petitioner

pursuant to transfer order dated 1st September, 2010.

Since the relieving order dated 2nd February, 2012 has been

issued, a copy of which has also been produced before this Court, the

grievance of the petitioner does not survive. The petition, in the

circumstances, is disposed of in view of the relieving order dated 2nd

February, 2012.

ANIL KUMAR, J.

J.R.MIDHA, J.

February 03, 2012 vk