Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13931 of 2020 Petitioner :- Ramesh Chandra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shailesh Verma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
2. The petitioner by means of the present writ petition has assailed the orders 20.10.2020 and 28.03.2009 passed by the District Commandant of Home Guards, Budaun by which the representation of petitioner for reinstatement has been rejected.
The order dated 20.10.2020 impugned in the writ petition reads as under:-
“dk;kZy;] ftyk dek.MsUV] gksexkM~Zl] cnk;w¡&243601 lh0;w0th0 ua0&8005194030 bZesy& cmdhgbd-up @nic.in ia=kd] 3410@nks&02@7@2018&19 fnukad] 20@10@2010 Jh jes'k pUnz iq= Jh Mksjh yky] fuoklh xzke&csgVk ikBd] iks0 djuiqj] ftyk cnk;wWA vki }kjk viuh iquZcgkyh gsrq viuk izR;kosnu fnukad 12-
10-2020 bl dk;kZy; eas izLrqr fd;k x;k gS] ftleas vki }kjk voxr djk;k x;k gS fd vkidks foHkkx ls o"kZ 2000 eas fM;Vh@ijMsw ij mifLFkr u gksus ds dkj.k vkidks foHkkx ls i`Fkd dj fn;k x;kA 'kkluns'k la[;k 57@2016@2455@ iUpkucs&16&332 gksxk@16 fnukad 02-12-2016 ds izLrj&4 ds vuqlkj HkwriwoZ gksexkMZ~l Lo;alsodkas }kjk viuk fu"dklu vkns'k tkjh gksus dh frfFk ls 06 o"kkZs ds mijkUr izLrqr fd;s tkus okys cgkyh lca/kh izR;kosnukas Lo;alsod ds izR;kosnukas vFkok 50 o"kksZ dh vk;q ls vf/kd HkwriwoZ gksexkMZ ij fdlh Hkh Lrj ij dksbZ fopj ugha fd;k tk;sxkA vkidk izR;kosnu fu"dklu ds yxHkx 20 o"kksZ ds mijkUr izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA vr% mijksDr 'kklukns'kkuqlkj vkids iquZogkyh izR;ksonu ij fdlh Hkh Lrj ls fopkj fd;k tkuk lEHko ugha gSA ¼jekdkUr ikBd½ ftyk dek.MsUV] gksexkMZ~l cnk;wWA”
3. From a perusal of aforesaid order, it is evident that services of the petitioner were dispensed with in the year 2000 and specific reason has been assigned by the District Commandant while rejecting the representation of the petitioner for reinstatement.
4. Since, the fact that services of the petitioner were dispensed with in the year 2000 is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner and more than 20 years have elapsed from the date of removal of petitioner from service, therefore, in the opinion of the Court, the reason assigned for rejecting the representation of petitioner is correct.
5. Thus, for the reasons given above, the writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 6.1.2021 Sattyarth