Lt Col Omendra Chauhan v. Union of India; Lt Col Sv Raout v. Union of India

Delhi High Court · 16 Aug 2022 · 2022:DHC:3058-DB
Rajiv Shakdher; Amit Bansal
W.P.(C) 7153/2021; W.P.(C) 7164/2021
2022:DHC:3058-DB
administrative appeal_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court allowed review petitions recalling its earlier orders for failing to address the petitioners' claim of arbitrary repatriation from DGQA and directed further consideration of the issue.

Full Text
Translation output
Review Pet.164/2021 in W.P.(C) 7153/2021 Review Pet.159/2021 in W.P.(C) 7164/2021
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
JUDGMENT
Reserved on : 15th July, 2022.
Judgment Delivered on : 16th August, 2022
W.P.(C) 7153/2021
LT COL OMENDRA CHAUHAN ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms Arati Mahajan Shedha, Advocate.
Versus
UNON OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY (DEFENCE PRODUCTION) & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr Vikram Jetly, CGSC.
W.P.(C) 7164/2021
LT COL SV RAOUT ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms Arati Mahajan Shedha, Advocate.
versus
UNON OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY (DEFENCE PRODUCTION) & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr Vikram Jetly, CGSC.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL
JUDGMENT
REVIEW PET. 164/2021 in W.P.(C) 7153/2021
REVIEW PET. 159/2021 in W.P.(C) 7164/2021

1. The present review petitions have been filed on behalf of the petitioners seeking review of the orders passed by this Court on 29th July, 2022:DHC:3058-DB 2021 in W.P.(C) 7153/2021 and W.P.(C) 7164/2021.

2. One of the main grounds for review is that the orders dated 29th July, 2021, did not deal with the petitioners’ contention with respect to the arbitrary and unequal treatment granted to the petitioners as compared to other similarly placed officers, who have been retained in the DGQA, whereas, the petitioners along with seven other officers have been repatriated back to the Indian army. In this regard, the petitioners sought relief in prayer clause ‘B’ of the writ petitions, which has not been dealt with in the order under review. Prayer clause ‘B’ of the above-captioned writ petitions is set out below: “B) Issue a direction to the Respondents to disclose on what basis/policy/grounds the Petitioner (along with 7 other officers) is being repatriated back to Army without being considered for Permanent Secondment in DGQA in accordance to the rules while more than 30 other similarly situated service officers who had been inducted into DGQA either along with the Petitioner or before or after him, who have also completed more than two years tenure with DGQA have been continued in DGQA, including around 20 who have even been granted a third tenure.”

3. This Court vide order dated 7th January, 2022 had noted the aforesaid contention on behalf of the petitioners and directed the respondents to file an affidavit with regard to the relief sought by the review petitioners in prayer clause ‘B’ in the main writ petitions. Pursuant to the said order, affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents on 24th February, 2022.

4. Clearly, the aforesaid aspect has not been dealt with in the orders dated 29th July, 2021 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 7153/2021 and W.P.(C) 7164/2021. Petitioners have made out a case for review. Accordingly, the review petitions are allowed and the judgment dated 29th July, 2021 in W.P.(C) 7153/2021 and W.P.(C) 7164/2021 are recalled.

5. The petitioners at this stage are not pressing the stay applications i.e., CM No.22590/2021 and CM No.22627/2021 filed along with the review petitions. Accordingly, the same are dismissed as withdrawn. W.P.(C) 7153/2021 W.P.(C) 7164/2021

6. List before the Roster Bench on 1st September, 2022. AMIT BANSAL, J. RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. AUGUST 16,2022 dk