Deepak Kumar vs.union of India & Ors

Deepak Kumar vs Union of India & Ors

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided May 30, 2018

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1215445

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1215445
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: May 30, 2018
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Deepak Kumar

Advocate Mr. Satish Kumar

Respondent

Union of India & Ors

Advocate Mr. J.K. Singh, Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, Ms. Madhulika Agarwal

Excerpt

.....on 26th april, 2014, the petitioner was transferred from delhi to muzaffar nagar. the petitioner retained the official quarter on the ground of sickness of his wife and made a request for extension of the retention period on 20th june, 2014 and 17th september, 2014.3. on 22nd september, 2014, the petitioner was transferred back to delhi whereupon the petitioner requested for regularisation of the accommodation retained by him. however, his request was rejected and the estate officer passed an eviction order which was challenged by the petitioner in the w.p.(c) 4329/2018 & cm no.16820-16821/2018 page 1 of 2 authority.4. this court is of the view that the official accommodation of the petitioner should have been regularised when the petitioner was transferred back to delhi. vide order dated 27th april, 2018, this court directed the matter to be placed before dgm (law), railways. mr. j.k. singh, learned standing counsel for railways has handed over the copy of the opinion of the dgm (law) who has agreed with the view of this court that the official accommodation of the petitioner should have been regularised when he was transferred back to delhi.5. the writ petition is allowed, impugned judgment dated 13th november, 2017 passed by the district judge as well as eviction order passed by the estate officer are hereby set aside and the official accommodation in occupation of the petitioner is hereby regularised. pending applications are disposed of.6. this court appreciates the fair view taken by the dgm (law) in this matter.7. copy of this judgment be given dasti to counsels for the parties under signature of court master. may24 2018 ak j.r.midha, j.w.p.(c) 4329/2018 & cm no.16820-16821/2018 page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

$~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:

30. h May, 2018 + W.P.(C) 4329/2018 & CM No.16820-16821/2018 DEEPAK KUMAR ........ Petitioner

Through: Mr. Satish Kumar and Mr.Vishal Patel, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS

Through: Mr. J.K. Singh, Standing Counsel with Mr. Ranjeet Kumar and Ms. Madhulika Agarwal, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The petitioner has challenged the impugned judgment dated 13th November, 2017 whereby the learned District Judge dismissed the petitioner’s appeal against the eviction order passed by the Estate Officer.

2. On 26th April, 2014, the petitioner was transferred from Delhi to Muzaffar Nagar. The petitioner retained the official quarter on the ground of sickness of his wife and made a request for extension of the retention period on 20th June, 2014 and 17th September, 2014.

3. On 22nd September, 2014, the petitioner was transferred back to Delhi whereupon the petitioner requested for regularisation of the accommodation retained by him. However, his request was rejected and the Estate Officer passed an eviction order which was challenged by the petitioner in the W.P.(C) 4329/2018 & CM No.16820-16821/2018 Page 1 of 2 authority.

4. This Court is of the view that the official accommodation of the petitioner should have been regularised when the petitioner was transferred back to Delhi. Vide order dated 27th April, 2018, this Court directed the matter to be placed before DGM (Law), Railways. Mr. J.K. Singh, learned Standing Counsel for railways has handed over the copy of the opinion of the DGM (Law) who has agreed with the view of this Court that the official accommodation of the petitioner should have been regularised when he was transferred back to Delhi.

5. The writ petition is allowed, impugned judgment dated 13th November, 2017 passed by the District Judge as well as eviction order passed by the Estate Officer are hereby set aside and the official accommodation in occupation of the petitioner is hereby regularised. Pending applications are disposed of.

6. This Court appreciates the fair view taken by the DGM (Law) in this matter.

7. Copy of this judgment be given dasti to counsels for the parties under signature of Court Master. MAY24 2018 ak J.R.MIDHA, J.

W.P.(C) 4329/2018 & CM No.16820-16821/2018 Page 2 of 2

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2018 Same Parties Deepak Kumar vs Union of India & Ors Same Subject Land Acquisition