Ms. Anjali Nehra, Adv. v. GOVT. OF NOT OF DELHI & ORS.

Delhi High Court · 20 May 2013 · 2013:DHC:6837
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKIJ. MEHTA; & Ors. decided on 24.1.2013.
WP(C) No. 3126/2001 titled as Anant Prasad & Ors. Vs. UOI
2013:DHC:6837
administrative petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed writ petitions by Home Guards seeking continuation and absorption, relying on a prior Division Bench ruling, but allowed revival if the Supreme Court rules in their favor.

Full Text
Translation output
i.lltol3 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 17408/2004
KAMLA PRASAD & ANR.
Petitioner
Through: Ms. Anjali Nehra, Adv.
VERSUS
GOVT. OF NOT OF DELHI & ORS.
Respondent
Through: Mr. Yogesh Saini, Adv. for Mr. V.K.Tandon, Adv. for R-1.
W.P.(C) 921/2010
DELHI HOME GUARD WELFARE ASSOCIATION & ANR. ....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Anjali Nehra, Adv.
VERSUS
GOVT.OF NCT DELHI & ORS.
W.P.(C) 3007/2010
SURENDER KUMAR
Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sunder Khatri, Adv.
VERSUS
GNCT OF DELHI AND ORS Mr. Amrit Pal Singh, Adv. for R-2.
W.R(C) 17408/2004 & conn. Page 1 of2
2013:DHC:6837
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKIJ. MEHTA
20.05.2013 An issue in the present cases is the claim of the petitioners who were
Home Guards for being continued their services as Home Guards as also for absorption. An identical issue has been decided by the Division Bench of this Court in WP(C) No. 3126/2001 titled as Anant Prasad & Ors. Vs. UOI
1.
& Ors. decided on 24.1.2013.
ORDER

2. In view of the decision of the Division Bench in W.P.(C) NO. 3126/2001, these writ petitions are also dismissed. Since thejudgment ofthe Division Bench dated 24.1.2013 is stated to have been challenged before the Supreme Court, in case the SLP is decided in favour ofthe persons such as the petitioners, then the petitioners will have a right to revive these writ petitions.

3. VALMIKIJ. MEHTA, J MAY 20, 2013 W W.P.(C) 17408/2004 & conn. Page 2 of[2] N A IS { JjT A- aIcjmc. 0%lr(