W.P.(C)No.4599/2010 Page 1 of 3 32 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C)No.4599/2010 and CM No.9093/2010 Date of Decision : 15th December, 2010 % MITRASEN ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. Kedar Nath Tripathi, Adv. versus UOI AND ORS ..... Respondents Through : Mr. Jagjit Singh and Mr. Asit Tiwari, Advs. CORAM :- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may NO be allowed to see the Judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? NO 3. Whether the judgment should be NO reported in the Digest? GITA MITTAL, J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner who is a Constable with the Indo Tibetan Border Police assails an order dated 29th May, 2010 whereby he has been transferred from the 3rd Battalion of the Border Security Force, Karera located at Shivpuri in Madhya Pradesh to the 5th Battalion posted at Leh, Laddakh. The petitioner also prays for directions to the respondents to recall the movement order dated 10th July, 2010 issued pursuant thereto. 2. In support of the writ petition, the petitioner has pleaded medical grounds and urged that he is undergoing treatment. It is urged that assignment of lighter duties had been medically advised. It is contended that the petitioner had sent a W.P.(C)No.4599/2010 Page 2 of 3 representation dated 29th May, 2010 to the respondents and no response thereto has been received. 3. Mr. Jagjit Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has taken a preliminary objection with regard to the territorial jurisdiction of this court. It is further urged that no representation from the petitioner has been received by the respondents. 4. So far as preliminary objection with regard to jurisdiction is concerned, having regard to the directions we propose to make, the same is not examined any further. The same is left open for consideration. 5. The respondents are directed to treat Annexure-P4 (page 26 with translation at page 22) to this writ petition as a representation made to them on behalf of the petitioner. The documents enclosed as Annexure-P3 be treated as documents in support of the representation. In case, the petitioner is required to be medically examined before taking a final view in the matter, the respondents may issue appropriate directions in this behalf. The petitioner shall abide by such directions and ensure that he makes himself available for such medical examination. 6. The respondents shall take a firm view on the aforenoticed representation of the petitioner within a period of two weeks from today and pass appropriate order thereon. The same shall be forthwith communicated to the petitioner thereafter. W.P.(C)No.4599/2010 Page 3 of 3 7. Pending consideration of the representation of the petitioner, the respondents shall keep the movement order of the petitioner in abeyance. The consequential order with regard to the petitioner’s service shall be passed accordingly. 8. This writ petition and application are disposed of in the above terms. Dasti to parties. GITA MITTAL, J J.R. MIDHA, J DECEMBER 15, 2010 mk