Patna High Court
Sarvesh Kumar vs The Union Of India on 27 January, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2146 of 2021
======================================================
Sarvesh Kumar Son of Sri Babulal Rai Resident of Village and Post Office-
Mahamada, Police Station- Baruraj, District- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Government of
India, New Delhi.
2. Director General, Tatrakshak Mukhyalaya, Coast Guard Headquarters, National
Stadium Complex, New Delhi.
3. Commander, Coast Guard Region, East Chennai.
4. Officer-in-Charge, Bureau of Naviks, Mankhurd, Mumbai.
5. Commanding Officer, Indian Coast Guard Station, Chennai.
6. Chief Staff Officer (Operators), Coast Guard (E), Chennai.
7. Commandant Regional Operation and Plan Officer for Commander Coast
Guard Region (East) Chennai.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Shekhar
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Dr.K.N.Singh (Asg)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 27-01-2022
The matter is heard via video conferencing due to
circumstances prevailing on account of the COVID-19
pandemic.
2. In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for
following reliefs:
"(i) For issuance of an
appropriate writ/s, direction/s, order/s in
the nature of mandamus for commanding
the respondent/s to accept/ allow the
petitioners representation dated 15th
January 2020 for request regarding
voluntary retirement from coast guard
service w.e.f. 1st November, 2020.
(ii) For issuance of an
Patna High Court CWJC No.2146 of 2021 dt.27-01-2022
appropriate writ/s, direction/s, order/s in
the nature of mandamus for commanding
the respondents to accept/ allow the
petitioner EP's leave application dated
20.10.2020.
(iii) Any other relief/s for the
petitioner may found entitled."
3. Short question for consideration in the present
petition is whether petitioner is entitled for voluntary retirement
or not? In this regard, petitioner's application/ representation
dated 15.01.2020 is pending consideration before the concerned
respondent.
4. Therefore, the concerned respondent is hereby
directed to take a decision on the petitioner's
representation/application dated 15.01.2020 as to whether he is
entitled to voluntary retirement in terms of the relevant
regulations. If he is entitled, necessary order shall be passed. If
petitioner is not, otherwise, entitled necessary speaking order shall
be passed and communicate to the petitioner. The above exercise
shall be completed within a period of one month from the date of
receipt of this order.
5. With the above observations, the instant petition
stands disposed of.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J)
rakhi/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date
Transmission Date
