Full Text
Through: .Mr Divyesh Pratap Singh and ~1r Suraj Prakash Sing~, Advocates.
Bhardwaj, GP \Vitil Ms Manisha Sarvha, Advocates for R-1.
Through: i\1r Divyesh Pratap Singb and \11' SU;'aj Prakash Sir:gh, Advocates.
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr tvfanish Mohdl1, CGSC, Mr J\1ohlt
13h3rdwaj, (iP with .Ms Mani~;h Sarclia, Ad"ocatel) for R-l.
'V!TH 'V.PJC) 11483/201'Z VIDHY ASAGAR UPAOH'.' AY ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr Divyesh Pratc.p Singh and Mi' Suraj Prakash Si!lgh, Adv(}':;ates.
Through: Mr Manish Mohan, CGSC, Mr Mohit Bhardwaj, GP with Ms Manisha
Saroha, Advocates for R-1. w.p.(e) 11484/2017
Through: Mr Divyesh Pratap Singh and Suraj Prakash Singh, Advocates.
Mr
Mr
Mr
0 • • • •
Through: ~1r tv1anish Mohan, CGSC: Mr Mohit Bhardwaj, OP with Ms Manisha y W1TH
W.P.if) 11528/2017 VIVEK TEMBE ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr Divyesh Pratap Singh and Mr
SUMAN GUPTA . ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr Divyesh Pratap Singh and :Mr \
Through: NIr l\1anish Mohan, CGSC, Mr Mohit Bh8rdwaj, GP with Ms Manisha
\ 21.12.2017 CM No.4674912017 in W.P/C) 11470120J 7 eM No.46795/2017 in W.P.CQ IJ47812q17 eM No. 46825/2017 in w..P.(e) 11483/2_017
I eM No.46827/2017 in w.p.{e) 11484/2017 eM No.46879/2017 in w.p.(e) 11503/2017 eM No.46954/2017 in w.p.{e) 11518/2017 eM No.46979/2017 in w.p.(e) 11528/2017 eM No.46988/2017 in w.p.{e) 11528/2017
ORDER
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. eM No.46749/2017 in w.p.{e) 11470/2017 & eM No.46748/2017 eM No.46795/2017 in w.p.(e) 11478/2017 & eM No.467942017 eM No.46825/2017 in w.p.(e) 11483/2017 & eM No.46824/2017 eM No.46827/2017 in w.p.(e) 11484/2017 & eM No.46826/2017 eM No.46879/2017 in w.p.(e) 1150312017 & eM No.46878/2017 eM No.46954/2017 in w.p.{e) 11518/2017 & eM No.46953/2017 eM No.46979/2017 in w.p.(e) 11528/2017 & eM No.46978/2017 eM No.46988/2017 in w.p.(e) 11528/2017 & eM No.46987/2017
2. The petitioners have filed the present petitions, inter alia, praying that directions be issued to respondent nos. 1 to 3 take a decision on their representation for recalling the order of censure issued against them. The petitioners claim that a Special Committee had been appointed to examine the representations made by the petitioners. And the Special Committee has since submitted its recommendations which are yet to be considered by the ~ administrator.
3. The learned counsel for the parties have also drawn the attention of this Court to an order dated 30.[1] 0.2017 passed in petitions raising similar issues: w.P.(C) 955612017 captioned Jai Krishna Agarwal v. Union of India and Drs and w.P.(C) 955712017 captioned 'Rajiv Nayan Pandey v. Union of India & Drs.. By the said order respondent nos. 1 to 3 were directed to take a final decision with regard to representation of the petitioners therein within a period of three months from that date.
4. The facts and issues being raised in the present petition being identical to the onc~ raised in those petitions, it would be apposite to dispos~ of the present petitions with similar directions. Accordi:1gly, respondent nos.[1] to 3 are directed tv take a final decision on the representations filed by the pet;tioners within a period of three mor.ths from today.
5. The petitions and the pending applications are disposed of with the aforesaid directions.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J. DECE~BER 21, 2017 MK