Delhi High Court
Alok Patel vs Union Of India And Ors. on 1 March, 2021
$~A-9,10,11,14,15,16&19
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
9
+ W.P. (C) 8199/2019
BISWAJIT ROY .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. K B Upadhyay, Advocate.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Suman Chauhan, Advocate.
Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocate for UOI.
10
+ W.P. (C) 9287/2020, CM APPL. 29956/2020
BHAGIRATH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. K B Upadhyay, Advocate.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Arnav Kumar, Senior Panel
(UOI).
Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocate for UOI.
11
+ W.P. (C) 10790/2019, CM APPL. 44578/2019
KAVENDRA SINGH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocate for UOI.
14
+ W.P. (C) 12925/2019, CM APPL. 52736/2019
ALOK PATEL .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. K B Upadhyay, Advocate.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents
W.P.(C) 8199/2019 and other connected matters Page 1 of 4
Through: Mr. Jitendra Kumar Tripathi,
Advocate with Mr. Suraj Kumar GP.
Mr. Kamal Kant Jha and
Ms. Sheetal Raghuvanshi, Advocates.
Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocate for UOI.
15
+ W.P. (C) 12929/2019, CM APPL. 52740/2019
HARJEET SINGH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. K B Upadhyay, Advocate.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Kamal Kant Jha and
Ms. Sheetal Raghuvanshi, Advocates.
Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocate for UOI.
16
+ W.P. (C) 12958/2019, CM APPL. 52829/2019
AMIT HANSDA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. K B Upadhyay, Advocate.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Kamal Kant Jha and
Ms. Sheetal Raghuvanshi, Advocates.
Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocate for UOI.
19
+ W.P. (C) 218/2020, CM APPL. 691/2020
AJAY KUMAR SINGH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. K B Upadhyay, Advocate.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. D S Mehandru, Advocate.
Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocate for UOI.
% Date of Decision: 01st March, 2021
W.P.(C) 8199/2019 and other connected matters Page 2 of 4
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ASHA MENON
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, J (Oral):
1. The petitions have been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. Present writ petitions have been filed challenging show cause notices
issued by the respondent No. 3 (Sashastra Seema Bal).
3. Learned counsel for the respondents raises preliminary objections to
the maintainability of the present writ petitions on the ground that they are
premature as they assail only show cause notices. He further submits that in
the event an adverse order is passed against the petitioners in pursuance to
the show cause notices, the petitioners have alternative effective remedy of
filing statutory appeals under Rule 29 of the Sashastra Seema Bal Rules,
2009.
4. In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioners states that
he would be satisfied in the event this Court were to direct that if
termination orders are passed in pursuance to the impugned show cause
notices, the same shall not be given effect to for a period of two weeks, so
that the petitioner can avail of the statutory remedy.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court directs that
the respondents shall pass a reasoned order disposing of the show cause
notices within two weeks. However, in the event the services of the
petitioners are terminated, then the said order shall not be given effect to for
two weeks, during which time, the petitioners shall be at liberty to file
statutory appeals under Rule 29 of Shasatra Seema Bal Rules, 2009. This
Court clarifies that it has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the
controversy. All the rights and contentions of the parties are left open.
6. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petitions along with
pending applications stand disposed of. Interim orders, if any, stand vacated.
7. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. Copy of the order be
also forwarded to the learned counsel through e-mail.
MANMOHAN, J
ASHA MENON, J
MARCH 01, 2021
TS
