Si/Exe Siyad M. vs Union Of India & Ors.
2021 Latest Caselaw 3373 Del

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 3373 Del
Judgement Date : 8 December, 2021

Delhi High Court

Si/Exe Siyad M. vs Union Of India & Ors. on 8 December, 2021

                   $~17
                   *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                        Date of Decision: 8thDecember, 2021

                   +     W.P.(C) 12646/2021

                         SI/EXE SIYAD M.                             ..... Petitioner
                                        Through:           Mr.Himanshu Gautam, Adv.
                                        versus

                         UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                       ..... Respondents
                                       Through:            Mr.Aman      Malik,    CGSC
                                                           alongwith            Assistant
                                                           Commandant Mithilesh Kumar
                         CORAM:
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
                         NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (Oral)

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for a direction to the respondents to extend the regular weekly off to the petitioner in terms of the CISF Circular No.30/2009/OPS dated 16.12.2009 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Circular').

2. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 11.11.2021, learned counsel for the respondents has today handed over a chart showing the leaves availed by the petitioner between 06.08.2021 till date. He, on instructions from Assistant Commandant Mithilesh Kumar, submits that the petitioner has been granted weekly off barring on a few occasions where he could not be granted the same due to the requirement of service or he was otherwise on leave/returning from leave and was not eligible to avail of the weekly off. He further

Signature Not Verified Signed By:SHALOO BATRA Location:

submits that in future, the petitioner would be granted weekly off in accordance with the Circular.

3. On being questioned about the regular leave being taken by the petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was forced to take such leave as he was not granted weekly off. He submits that if the petitioner would have been granted weekly off, he would not have to take such leave.

4. In view of the explanation and assurance given by the learned counsel for the respondent, no further order is called for in the present writ petition.