cover was downgraded from Z+ to Z category. Before
the learned Single Judge it was contended that downgrading of security
cover ignores real and apparent ... Z from the Z+ and NSG cover was withdrawn. The learned
Single Judge took note of the fact that the appellant was given Z+ security
Kashmir. Admittedly all the three petitioners are enjoying 'Z'
and 'Z+' security. Whereas petitioner No. 1 is enjoying 'Z ... fact deriving their right of
a 'Z' and 'Z+' security only because they are family members of Mr. Omar
Abdullah
petitioner,
the Security Categorization Committee after reviewing the entire security
arrangement (threat based) has downgraded the security to Z from the Z+
and NSG cover ... dealing with the question of downgrading security/security
cover:-
"6.............The ground of a particular category of
security cover or its upgradation are matters
said premises was maintained.
(iii) Petitioner was provided with "Z" security cover. One of the grievances of the petitioner is that ... Z". Learned counsel submits that policy decision taken by the Central Government is that those with "Z" category security cover would
learned Single Judge that the three
appellants are enjoying Z and Z plus security. The accommodation was allotted to the
husband/father of the appellants ... justified in holding that they derive the right of a Z and Z plus security
protectees only because being the family members of Mr. Omar
31st August, 1991 but he continued to enjoy the 'Z' scale security till
March, 1993 when after considering the threat perception ... been filed stating
that as per rules only 'Z+' security provided persons are entitled to be
considered for retention / allotment of government accommodation
Seema Sapra vs General Electric Co. & Ors. on 2 March, 2015
Author: S. Ravindra
Further, she is
unemployed and is also a recipient of "Z" security with her
children being "Z+" protectees. It is stated
Further, she is
unemployed and is also a recipient of "Z" security with her
children being "Z+" protectees. It is stated
security on the ground that she is a whistle
blower. Petitioner in different applications and in the writ petition
has claimed security and even Z
