Ram Krishn Rajpal vs Union Of India & Ors.
2018 Latest Caselaw 2195 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                      Date of Order: April 09, 2018
+     W.P.(C) 3439/2018 & C.M. 13596/2018
      RAM KRISHN RAJPAL                                 ..... Petitioner
                   Through:            Ms. Saahila Lamba, Advocate

                         Versus

      UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                               ..... Respondents
                          Through: Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj &
                           Mr. T.P. Singh, Advocates
      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
                          ORDER

(ORAL)

1. Petitioner's request for cancellation of transfer stands declined vide order of 7th March, 2018 (Annexure P-8). Petitioner claims to have appeared before the Estate Officer on 14th March, 2018 and on the said date, he had come to know about rejection of his Representation. As per petitioner, the Estate Officer had orally directed him to vacate the accommodation allotted to him in New Delhi by 10th April, 2018 without passing any formal order in eviction proceedings. In this petition, retention of Group Pool Residential Accommodation No. A-330, Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi is sought by petitioner.

2. Counsel for petitioner submits that as per guidelines issued by respondent No.2- Directorate of Estate, which are being uniformly followed, an employee, who has been transferred to Northern-Eastern region, is entitled to retain the accommodation at the last place on posting.

3. In the facts and circumstances of this case, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of this petition with direction to petitioner to make a Representation to third respondent within a week for retention of accommodation in question, who shall consider it in the light of applicable guidelines and pass a speaking order thereon within a period of two weeks. The fate of petitioner's Representation be conveyed to petitioner within a week thereafter, so that petitioner may avail of the remedies, as available in law, if need be. It is made clear that if eviction proceedings against petitioner have been concluded, then the order passed be conveyed to petitioner within a week so that petitioner may appeal against it, if so advised. Till petitioner is intimated about outcome of his Representation or till the order in the eviction proceedings is furnished to petitioner, status quo as of today in respect of accommodation in question be maintained.

4. With aforesaid observations, this petition and application are disposed of.

5. A copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of Court Master to counsel for the parties.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE

APRIL 09, 2018 r