Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Taufiqq Ahmad Khan vs Union Of India & Ors on 31 August, 2020

$~10 & 11.
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+        W.P.(C) 5840/2020
         TAUFIQQ AHMAD KHAN                                       ..... Petitioner
                     Through:                  Mr.Anilendra Pandey and Mr.
                                               Brajesh Pandey, Advs.

                                            versus
         UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                                   ..... Respondents
                       Through:                Mr. Rishabh Sahu, CGSC.
                                            AND

+        W.P.(C) 5843/2020
         TAUFIQQ AHMAD KHAN                                        ..... Petitioner
                          Through:             Mr.Anilendra Pandey and Mr.
                                               Brajesh Pandey, Advs.

                                            versus
         UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                     ..... Respondents
                         Through: Mr. Tanveer Ahmed Ansari, CGSC.
         CORAM:
         HON' BLE MR. J USTICE RAJ IV SAHAI ENDLAW
         HON' BLE MS. J USTICE ASHA MENON
                  ORDER

%                 31.08.2020
[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]
CM APPL. 21119/2020 in W.P.(C) 5840/2020 and                           CM APPL.

21123/2020 in W.P.(C) 5843/2020 (both for exemption).

1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions and as per extant rules.

2. The applications stand disposed of.

W.P.(C) 5840/2020 & W.P.(C) 5843/2020.

3. The petitioner, a Lance Naik in the respondents Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), has filed W.P.(C) No.5840/2020 seeking a mandamus W.P.(C) 5840/2020 & W.P.(C) 5843/2020 Page 1 of 3 to the respondents CRPF to extend the benefit of Assured Career Progression (ACP) (now Modified Assured Career Progression) Scheme to the petitioner and has filed W.P.(C) No.5843/2020 impugning the order dated 16th June, 2012 meted out to him the punishment of stoppage of increment of two years without cumulative effect and treating him as remaining suspended from 31st January, 2011 to 3rd November, 2011.

4. The challenge, as would immediately be apparent, in W.P.(C) No.5843/2020 is highly belated, after eight years from the order meeting out the punishment; it is however the plea of the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.5843/2020 that he has preferred a Departmental Appeal against the order dated 16th June, 2012 impugned in W.P.(C) No.5843/2020 but the said Departmental Appeal has not been decided. Mandamus, for decision thereof is also sought.

5. Issue notice.

6. Notice is accepted by the counsel for the respondents CRPF.

7. If any Departmental Appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 16th July, 2012 is pending and has not been decided till now, the same be decided within four weeks of today and the decision be placed before this Court. Else, counter affidavit in W.P.(C) No.5843/2020, explaining the status, be filed.

8. Similarly, counter affidavit be filed in W.P.(C) No.5840/2020, within the said period of four weeks. However notwithstanding the same, if the petitioner is entitled to any ACP/MACP benefit and same has not been granted to the petitioner till now, within the same four weeks, the said benefit be also released to the petitioner.

9. Rejoinders within further two weeks thereafter.

10. List on 11th November, 2020.

RAJ IV SAHAI ENDLAW, J ASHA MENON, J AUGUST 31, 2020 'pp'..