WP (C) No.2791/2010 Page 1 of 4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) No.2791/2010 % Date of Decision: 27.04.2010 Dr.A.K.Belwal …. Petitioner Through Dr.A.K.Belwal, Petitioner in person. Versus Union of India & Ors. …. Respondents Through Mr.A.K.Bhardwaj & Mr.M.P.Singh, Advocates for the respondent No.1/UOI. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOOL CHAND GARG 1. Whether reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? YES 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? NO 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? NO ANIL KUMAR, J. * The petitioner in this writ petition seeks a direction to the respondent that he may be given all the benefits, promotion and increase in salary prayed for and granted by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in its order dated 7th January, 1999, the High Court’s Order dated 24th November, 1999 and the Supreme Court’s order dated 24th July, 2008. WP (C) No.2791/2010 Page 2 of 4 The petitioner, after some arguments, contends that he is aggrieved by the order dated 12th December, 2008 whereby his miscellaneous application seeking implementation of the directions of the Tribunal in O.A. No.1206/1993 was dismissed. The Tribunal has noted that it is clear that the order dated 7th January, 1999 passed in O.A.No.1288 of 1993 has already been considered in detail in O.A. No.1603 of 2001. It was held that the petitioner has already got relief which was sought in O.A.No.1206 of 1993 as he got the relief in so far as his promotion to Senior Time Scale from Junior Time Scale (hereinafter referred to as ‘the STS & JTS’) is concerned. Learned counsel, Mr.A.K.Bhardwaj, appearing on advance notice has pointed out that an order dated 7th January, 1999 after noticing petitioner’s ACRs as well as the review DPC proceedings and after considering rule 13 of IES Rules was passed by the Tribunal. The department had held review DPC for promotion from STS to JAG on various dates between 1st February, 1989 and 13th December, 1992. The review DPC, however, had not recommended the case of the petitioner in the select list for promotion from STS to JAG. Later on, the DPC was held on 10th May, 1994, however, the petitioner was found to be fit for promotion, and recommended his case for promotion to JAG. In the circumstances, no irregularity or illegality in the proceedings of the Review DPC was found and the reliefs claimed WP (C) No.2791/2010 Page 3 of 4 by the petitioner were declined. The reliefs granted to the petitioner has already been implemented and consequently, the reliefs claimed in M.A.No.1531 of 2008 in O.A.No.1288 of 1993 had not survived, however, the petitioner approached the Tribunal knowing fully well that the issues raised by him in the miscellaneous application had already been settled. The Tribunal thus, noticed all the facts and circumstances and considering the pleas and contentions had dismissed the application of the petitioner by the order dated 12th December, 2008 in M.A.No.1531 of 2008. Considering the pleas and contentions raised by the petitioner, we do not find any perversity, illegality or irregularity in the order of the Tribunal dated 12th December, 2008 so as to necessitate any interference by this Court in exercise of its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Though the order was passed on 12th December, 2008, the petitioner has also failed to explain as to why he has approached the Court almost after two years. Various other petitions filed by the petitioner are already pending in this Court. In totality of facts and circumstances, there is no ground to interfere with the order of the Tribunal, or to grant any of the relief sought by the petitioner in the present writ petition. WP (C) No.2791/2010 Page 4 of 4 The writ petition, in the facts and circumstances, is without any merit, therefore, it is dismissed. ANIL KUMAR, J. APRIL 27, 2010 MOOL CHAND GARG, J. ‘vK’