Ashok Kumar vs Union Of India And Ors.
2016 Latest Caselaw 3760 Del

$~6.
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+     W.P.(C) 10209/2015
      ASHOK KUMAR                                       ..... Petitioner
                         Through: Ms. Jyoti Sïngh, Senior Advocate with
                         Mr. Dinesh Yadav, Advocate

                         versus

      UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.                     ..... Respondents
                    Through: Ms. Jaswinder Singh, Advocate with
                    Dr. G.L. Bhatia, Advocate

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

                         ORDER

% 18.05.2016

1. After hearing the counsels for the parties, a detailed order was passed

on 13.01.2016, whereafter the matter was taken up on several dates. The

present order is in continuation of the orders dated 06.05.2016 and

11.05.2016. On 11.05.2016, it had been enquired from the counsel for the

respondents as to why has the petitioner not been deployed at the Embassy

of India at Kathmandu, Nepal just as the other two officers mentioned in

para 2 of the said order, were deployed.

2. Today, counsel for the respondents states that without going further

into the controversy and keeping in mind the fact that one vacancy in the

rank of Sub-Inspector, CISF has been reserved in terms of the order dated

13.01.2016 passed in the present proceedings, the respondents shall deploy

the petitioner for duty at the Embassy of India at Kathmandu, Nepal. He,

however, submits that the present case may not be treated as a precedent for

any other case as the said concession has been given in view of the peculiar

facts of the case in hand.

3. In view of the submission made by the counsel for the respondents,

the present petition is disposed of with directions issued to the respondents

to deploy the petitioner for duty at the Embassy of India at Kathmandu,

Nepal, on or before 09.07.2016.

4. It is clarified that the order passed above is in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case and shall not be treated as a precedent in any other case.

HIMA KOHLI, J

SUNIL GAUR, J MAY 18, 2016 rkb