Full Text
Translation output
e6# oho3.10.2011 a
D, /
Mr. M. Prashant
Present:
+W.P.(C) No.544Ol2O11 t<
' Counsel for the respondent has produced a copy of the letter dated 2I.9.20L1, whereby the Railway Board has agreed to allow the petitioner to retain Type Vl, Flat No. 57-8, S.P. Marg, New Delhi till his tenure in RCT, Gaziabad.
Ms. Geeta Luthra, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that said extension has been granted to the petitioner by the Railway Board in terms of the circular dated 2O.IL.2006 which is under challenge in the present petition, and therefore, the petitioner under the said circular can be put to certain conditions post retirement. The contention of the counsel is that the petitioner in the present petition has taken a plea that the case of the petitioner would be covered under the circular dated L9.IO.2OO4, which had received the approval of the
Minister while the circular dated 20.11,2006 was neither approved by the minister nor got any sanction. So far the said issue is concerned, the same will remain open to the'petitioner as and
Ms. Geeta Luthra, for the petitioner.
Mr. R.N. Singh for
Sr. Advocate with the respondent.
V'
{"
2011:DHC:16141
Y
4. when the stage arises. Since the petitioner has been allowed to retain the government accommodation in question till his tenure in RCT, Gaziabad, therefore no further directions are called for in the present petition.
The present petition is accordingly disposed of in telms of the above order keeping the aforesaid legal issue open.
October 03, 2011 mg
SH GAMBHIR, J
2011:DHC:16141
D, /
Mr. M. Prashant
Present:
+W.P.(C) No.544Ol2O11 t<
' Counsel for the respondent has produced a copy of the letter dated 2I.9.20L1, whereby the Railway Board has agreed to allow the petitioner to retain Type Vl, Flat No. 57-8, S.P. Marg, New Delhi till his tenure in RCT, Gaziabad.
Ms. Geeta Luthra, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that said extension has been granted to the petitioner by the Railway Board in terms of the circular dated 2O.IL.2006 which is under challenge in the present petition, and therefore, the petitioner under the said circular can be put to certain conditions post retirement. The contention of the counsel is that the petitioner in the present petition has taken a plea that the case of the petitioner would be covered under the circular dated L9.IO.2OO4, which had received the approval of the
Minister while the circular dated 20.11,2006 was neither approved by the minister nor got any sanction. So far the said issue is concerned, the same will remain open to the'petitioner as and
Ms. Geeta Luthra, for the petitioner.
Mr. R.N. Singh for
Sr. Advocate with the respondent.
V'
{"
2011:DHC:16141
Y
4. when the stage arises. Since the petitioner has been allowed to retain the government accommodation in question till his tenure in RCT, Gaziabad, therefore no further directions are called for in the present petition.
The present petition is accordingly disposed of in telms of the above order keeping the aforesaid legal issue open.
October 03, 2011 mg
SH GAMBHIR, J
2011:DHC:16141
JUDGMENT