Delhi High Court
Lt Col (Dr) N Muthukrishnan vs Union Of India & Ors on 28 April, 2016
$~37.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 3603/2016 and CM APPL. 15468-69/2016
LT COL (DR) N MUTHUKRISHNAN ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Swati Gupta, Advocate with
Mr. S. Anand and Mr. Ramya Kuty, Advocates
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, CGSC with
Mr. Mimansak Bhardwaj, Advocate and
Mr. Devashish Dikshit, SM, AMS-15.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
% 28.04.2016
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition praying inter alia for
quashing his posting order dated 23.02.2016, whereunder he has been posted
from Bangalore to Gaya. In the alternate, the petitioner seeks directions to
the respondents/Indian Army to post him elsewhere so that his family can
retain the current accommodation.
2. Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, counsel for the respondents, who appears on
advance notice, states on instructions that the plea taken by the petitioner
that there is no Army Public School available at Gaya for the petitioner's
younger daughter to complete her +2 after class 10, is incorrect for the
reason that there are ten schools in Gaya that have +2 facilities and out of
the said ten schools, there are four schools that are within the Cantonment
area including two Kendriya Vidyalyas and two private schools. He states
that the petitioner has been accommodated for a place of posting on several
occasions and this time, he was directed to join his place of posting on
23.03.2016. However, at his request, the petitioner has been granted two
extensions, i.e., till 11.04.2016 and then till 02.05.2016.
3. Counsel for the respondents states on instructions that if the petitioner
is requesting that he be permitted to retain the current family
accommodation at Bangalore, he can be accommodated only for a period of
one year, particularly, since there is a paucity of accommodation at his place
of posting at Gaya. However, the petitioner shall have to vacate the family
accommodation at Bangalore after one year and make alternate
arrangements.
4. Counsel for the petitioner states that she has obtained instructions
from her client to the effect that the petitioner is ready and willing to report
at his place of posting on 02.05.2016 on an assurance from the respondents
that they shall permit him to retain the family accommodation at Bangalore
for a period of one year. She adds that the petitioner may be permitted to
represent to the respondents for a change of his place of posting to a field
posting after he joins duty at his place of posting at Gaya.
5. In view of the submission made by the counsel for the respondents
that the petitioner's family shall not be displaced from the official
accommodation being occupied by them at Bangalore for a period of one
year, i.e., till the petitioner's younger daughter completes her 10 th class, the
petitioner shall be entitled to retain the said accommodation for a period of
one year, whereafter he shall make alternate arrangements in the event his
family proposes to remain at Bangalore. Liberty is granted to the petitioner
to submit a representation to the respondents to grant him a field posting,
after he joins his duty at Gaya.
6. The petition is disposed of alongwith the pending applications.
DASTI.
HIMA KOHLI, J
SUNIL GAUR, J
APRIL 28, 2016
rkb
