* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.2469/2010 YADUNATH SINGH Petitioner Through Ms. Rekha Palli, Adv. with Ms. Punam Singh, Adv. versus UOI AND ORS Respondents Through Mr. Ravinder Agarwal, Adv. for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR ORDER % 23.04.2010 The petitioner is serving as Deputy Commandant, Law Officer, Grade II with the Border Security Force. The petitioner claims that in the Departmental Promotion Committee (hereinafter referred to as "DPC" for brevity) held on 12th January, 2010 for recommending persons for promotion to the post of Law Officer Grade I, the petitioner was found to be 4 the senior most Law Officer Grade II who was considered along with his juniors. The petitioner has submitted that his name was recommended for relaxation of the requisite qualifying service by the DPC in terms of the recruitment rules. Ms. Palli, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has filed a representation dated 3 Fd March, 2010 in this behalf Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified wherein he has also sought personal interview of the Special Secretary or the concerned Joint Secretary of the Ministry of Home Affairs, which has not been considered. In this background, the present writ petition was filed as the petitioner is due for superannuation on 30 April, 2010 and two persons junior to the petitioner as Law Officer Grade II have been promoted by a signal dated 29th March, 2010 to the post of Law Officer Grade I w.e.f. April, 2010. We have heard Mr. Ravinder Agarwal, learned standing counsel for the respondents who has submitted that the matter is pending consideration in the Ministry of Home Affairs whose decision thereon is awaited. In the foregoing facts and circumstances, this writ petition does not need to detain us any further. The petitioner's request that his communication dated 31d March, 2010 be treated as a representation seeking relaxation in the minimum qualifying service for appointment as • Law Officer Grade I as per the recruitment rules is accepted. We also find that legally there can be no possible objection to the 4 grant of the petitioner's request for a personal hearing by the concerned Joint Secretary/Special Secretary in the Ministry of Home Affairs who is to consider the petitioner's representation. We accordingly direct the petitioner to appear before such authority on 27th April, 2010 at 2.30 p.m. In case such date and time is not convenient, the petitioner may be informed of the earliest possible date when he would appear before the officer -3- 1-~ concerned. The respondents are directed to consider the representation and appropriate orders be passed thereon by the respondent no.1 within a period of two weeks from today. Copy of the order which is passed shall be communicated by the respondents to the petitioner. In case the outcome on the petitioner's representation is favourable, orders for all consequential which would enure to the benefit of the • petitioner, be passed expeditiously. . 8. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the contentions. In case the petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the respondents, it shall be open to him to assail the same by way of appropriate proceedings. This petition is allowed in the above terms. Copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of the court master of this court. S 4 GITA ITTAL4 INDERMET KAUR, J APRIL 23, 2010 aa