Union of India & Ors v. Ashes Kiran Prasad

SANJIV KHANNA, J. For detailed order see WP(C)4679/2015 Ashes Kiran Prasad Vs. Union OfIndia & Ors. pronounced today. C SANJIV KH ^NA, J .

NAJMI WAZIRI, J. FEBRUARY^/,2016 ssn ^ Signed By:RAM DATT Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. r IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4679/2015 Reservedon: 29'^anuary,2016 Dateofdecision:-^^February,2016 ASHES KIRAN PRASAD Petitioner Through: Mr. Ravi Sikri, Senior Advocate with Ms. Ayushi Kiran, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent Through: Mr. V.S.R. Krishna, Advocate. W.P.(GV 6202/2015 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner . Through: Mr; V.S.R. Kriskia, Advocate. versus \ ASHES KIRANPRASAD Respondent Through: ;Mr., Ravi Sikri, Senior Advocate with Ms. Ayushi Kiran, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMIWAZIRI SANJIV KHANNA. J. These two writ petitions by Ashes Kiran Prasad and the Union of India (through Secretary Railway Board); Member Staff-RailwayBoard, General Manager, North Frontier Railway and General Manager, North Western Railway, impugn a common order dated 13^^ November, 2014, passed by the Principal Bench, Central AdministrativeTribunal, Delhi (Tribunal,for short) and, hence, are being disposed of by this common judgment.

¶2The impugned order passed in OA No.4241/2013,filed by Ashes Kiran Prasad (hereinafterreferred to as 'employee')directs that for the WP(C)Nos.4679&6202-2015 j period 30'*^ October, 2003 to 26^^ October,2007, when the employeewas posted on promotion at North-West Frontier Railway, Gauhati, in the Senior Administrative Grade, he would be entitled to payment of House Rent Allowance (HRA) at the rates applicable at Patna on the basic pay paid to the employee in the Senior Administrative Grade. The Union of India was accordingly directed to calculate the difference in the HRA payable, and pay the same within three months from the date of the order. The Union of India is aggrievedby the aforesaidorder. The employee,on the other hand, is aggrieved by the finding of the Tribunal that he would not be entitled to payment of HRA ori his transfer to Jaipur, in the North westernRailways(NW Railways)with effectfrom 27^^ October,2007 as he was in occupation of government,accommodation. •

¶3The employeeis an officerof thie IndianRailwayTrafficServiceand was posted at Patna in the East-CentralRailway (EC Railways) before being transferred to Gauhati in ;th:e:North-East Fronfier Railway (NF Railway)on promotionto the SeniorAdministrativeGrade. The employee joinedthe postingatGauhatiand remainedpostedthere from 30'*' October, 2003 to 26"^ October, 2007, when he was transferredto North-Western Railway, at Jaipur. , ,

¶4The employeeclaims that while at Hajipur,Bihar, he was drawing HRA ofRs.2015/-calculatedatthe rate of 15% ofhis basicpay inthe scale ofJunior AdministrativeGrade. The claim, which has been acceptedby the Tribunal, was that on being promoted and posted at Gauhati in the Senior AdministrativeGrade, HRA should be based and computed on enhancedbasicpay inthe promotionalpost.

¶5Consequentto promotionof the employeeto SeniorAdministrative Grade and posting at Gauhati, the employee was given government accommodationat Gauhati. However, the employee continued to get WP(C)Nos.4679&6202-2015 ^ payment of HRA at Hajipur, Bihar in terms of the policy applicableto officerspostedto the NP Railwaythat they wouldbe allowedto retainthe allottedquarterat the previousplace of postingor the employeewould be entitled to draw additional or second HRA at the same rate as paid prior to the officer being posted in the NF Railway.

¶6The submission and reasoning, which has been accepted by the Tribunal, is that HRA is paid on a specified percentage of basic pay and this amount would increase every year on account of armual increments or on further promotion and, therefore, HRA would not remain static or fixed. HRA would increase with increments qr when the basic pay is increased. It is pointed out that in'case the employee had been promoted and was granted Senior Administrative Grade at Patiaa arid was thereafter transferredto Gauhatrin NF Rail#a^, he wouldhave drawna higherHRA. The policy, relied upon by the Uniori"ofIndia, was iniquitous and falls foul of Article 14. Prior to the posting, at Gauhati, when the employee was posted at Hajipur in the East-Central,Railway, a controversy had arisen as to whether the employee should,be paid HRA at Patna rate, where he was residing, or as applicable and payable at Hajipur, Bihar; The Patna rate was higher than the HRA payable at Hajipur. The employee's claim to HRA payable at Patna rate was accepted by.theCentral Administrative Tribunal, Patna and the Patna High Court. The Supreme Court had dismissed the Special Leave Petition.

¶7In order to decide the controversy,we would like to first reproduce paragraph 1703 of the Indian Railway Establishment Code, which reads as under:- "1703 The rates of House Rent Allowancewhich may be granted with effectfrom 1.8.1997to Railwaysei-vantsstationedin A-1, A, B-1, B-2, C classand unclassifiedcitiesare givenbelow:- Classification of cities/towns Rates of House Rent Allowance WP(C)Nos.4679&6202-2015 p"gg5gj-A-1 30% of actual basis pay drawn A 15 % of actual basis pay drawn B-1 15 % of actual basis pay drawn B-2 15 % of actual basis pay drawn C

7.5 % of actual basis pay drawn Unclassified 5 % of actual basis pay drawn House Rent Allowance at the above rates shall be admissible to all Railway servants (other than those provided with Government owned/hired accommodation) without reference to the quantum of rent paid, without requiring them to produce any rent receipts. Such railway servants shall, however, be required to furnish a certificate that they are incurring some expenditure on rent/contributing toward rent. House Rent Allowance at the above rates shall also be admissible to.Railway servants living in their own houses subject to their furnishing a certificate that they are. paying/contributing.towards house or property tax or maintenance of the house. . : ; - NOTE: Where House Rent;Allowance has been allowed under special orders, the same'shall be given as admissible in A-1, A, B-1, and B-2 cities, as the case may be, until issue of orders to the contrary. w - ? (Authority: Railway Eibaird's^let No:E(P&A),II-97/HRA-19 dated340.2005)." • It is pertinent to mention thatPatna is an 'AVclass city and, therefore,an employeeposted at Patna is'entitled,tordraw HRA @ 15% of his actual basicpay drawn. As per the case of the employee,the JointHinduFamily of whichhe was a member,had a house/residenceandhe had occupiedthe same on rent at Patna.

¶8Relevantportion of the department'sletter dated 30^'' June, 2013, which incorporatesspecialprovisionsin respectof employeestransferredto NF Railway reads as under:- "8.2 Specialprovisionin respectof employeestransferredto N.F. Railway. IVPfQNos.4679 &6202-2015 a. ' A Railway employee who has all India transfer liability or, in the exigencies of public service, is posted on transfer to the N.F. Railway, excluding Katihar Division, will be permitted to retain railway accommodation allotted to him/her at the last station or his/her posting, on payment of normal rent/single flat rate of licence fee/rent for the first two months and thereafter 1 !/2 times the normal rent/flat rate of licence fee/rent. However, officers posted subsequently to Kathihar Division will continue to get this benefit on personal basis. b. Staff posted to the Kathir Division of N.F. Railway will be governed by the rules and orders, as applicable to the generality of railway employees in regard to retention of quarters and paymeiit. of licence fee/rent therefor. The eligibility to these concessions^of staff initially posted on transfer to N.F. Railway i)ivisioiisother than Katihar, will cease if and when they ar§. posted to, any station in Katihar Division." ;- • - \

¶9The RailwayBoardvide letterNo. E (P&A)II-83/[iRA-29dated30^'' June, 1984, had examined the questionof payment of HRA to railway employeespostedin the States ofAssam,iMeghalaya,Nagaland,Manipur etc. and had accorded as under "Sub: Allowanceand facilitiesfor Railway.eniployeesserving in the States and Union Territoriesof North EasternRegion-Improvements thereof- ^: The questionofpaymentofHouseRent Allowanceto railway employeeswho are posted iii the States ofAssam, Mehalaya, Manipur, Nagaland, and Tripura and the Union Territoriesof Amnachal Pradesh, Mizoram and Andaman & Nicober Islands has been consideredand the Presidentis pleasedto decide as follows

(a) Railway employees who were in occupationof hired private accommodationat the last station of posting before transferto any ofthe State/UnionTerritoriesmentionedabove, may be allowedto draw House Rent Allowanceadmissibleto them at that station. WPiQNos.4679&6202-2015 ^ ly V

(b) Such railwayemployeesmay also be allowedto draw, in additionto (a) above, House Rent Allowanceat the rates admissible at the new place of posting in the aforesaid states/Union Territories in case they live in hired private accommodation.

(c) These orders will take effectfrom 1'' November,1983 and will remain in force for a periodofthree years upto 31'' October, 1986.

¶3This issues with the concurrence of the Finance Directorate of the Ministry of Railways.

¶4Hindi version is enclosed."

¶10A readingofthe specialprovision8.2 wouldelucidatethat a railway employee posted on transferto Railway, except Kafihar Division,is entitled to retain railway acconiniodation::allotted to him/her at the last station of posting on payment,of\normal rent/singleflat rate of licence fee/rent for the. first two months :and.therMer at a rate of one and a half times the normal rent. Letterofthe RailwayBoard dated 30'^ June, 1984 relates to railway employees,'who are in occupation of hired private accommodationat the last stationof postingbeforebeing transferredto the specified States. Pertinently,there is a clear stipulationthat the HRA admissible to them would be that as was last paid at that station. In other words, it would be a static or fixed amount at the said place of posting and would not be enhanced. Clause 'b' of the said letter postulates that an employee can also draw HRA at the rates applicable at the new place of posting, in case he/she lives in a hired private accommodation.Thus, two HRAs become payable to an employee posted in the said States under clauses 'a' and 'b'. The HRA at the place of posting is a matter of right, whereas HRA at the first place of posting is only by way of a concession. WP(C)Nos. 4679 & 6202-2015 V

¶11The RailwayBoardby^asubsequentletterdated4^^ September,1986 has clarifiedthat the aforesaid concessionin respect of the last station postinggrantedto arailwayservantin terms of the letterdated June, 1984,wouldnot changeand wouldbe afixed sum. Relevantportionofthe said letter reads as under:- SINo. XX XX Points raised XX Whether the quantum of HRA at the last station where the family continues to stay would change with reference to pay of ' the Railway servants at neW;;place of posting: / XX Clarification XX The concession will be available to the Railways servants, without any change, till the concerned Railway servant remain .posted in North-Eastem Region, and Andamari . . and Nicobar Islands-and the family continues to stay at the last station. Xx

¶12At this stage, we would like to reproducethe reasoninggiven by the Tribunal to allow the prayer and hold,that the, employee would be entitled to HRA for the last station.postingat.the enhanced pay scale. The said reasoning reads:- "8.2 The Railway Board's letter No.E (P&A) II-83/HRA-29 dated

30.6.1984 contains the decision of the President that the Railway employees who were in occupation of hired private accommodationat the last station of posting before transfer to any of the States of Assam, Meghalaya, Manipur, Nagaland, and Tripura and the Union TeiTitories of Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram and Andaman & Nicober Islands, may be allowed to draw HRA admissible to them at that station. While clarifying point no.4, the Railway Board, vide its letter dated

4.9.1986, has not stated that the quantum of HRA at the last station, where the family of the transferred Railway employee WP(C)Nos. 4679 & 6202-2015 Page 7 of15 continues to stay, would not change with reference to pay of the Railway servant at the new place of posting, nor has it stated that the Railway servant will not be entitled to HRA with reference to his pay at the new place of posting. It has only been clarified that the concession will be available to the Railway servants, without any change, till the concerned Railway servants remain posted in North-Eastem Region and Andaman & Nicobar Islands and the family continues to stay at the last station. That is to say that the concession which has been granted by the Railway Board, vide its letter dated 30.6.1984, will be available without any change, meaning thereby that the terms and conditions for payment of HRA contained in the letter dated

30.6.1984 will remain unchanged. The concession which has been granted by the Railway Board, vide its letter-dated 30.6.1984, is that Railway employees who. were in occupation of hired private accommodation at the last station-of posting before transfer to any of the States of Assam,-Meghalaya,;Manipur,Nagaland,and Tripura and the Union . Terfitories of. Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram and Andaman ^ Nicobar Islands,:^ allowed to draw HRA admissible to them at that station-. It has not been stipulated in the said: letter.;dated 30.6.1984 that the Railway employee may be allowed to draw the same quantum of HRA which he was getting at the-last station where^ his family continuesto stay. As-perGovermnentorders/mlespertainingto payment of HRA to.'Goyeniiheritemployees, HRA is payable with reference to the pay. drawn by them from time to time and there is no concept, of any fixed HRA payable to regular employeesbecausetheir;payvariesfrom time to time on grantof increments and/or promotion from lower post to higher post and/orreversionfrom higherpost to lowerpost. Therefore,non paymentof HRAto the applicantwithreferenceto his pay drawn in N.F.Railway, Guwahati, at the rate applicable to Patna, does not stand to reason; besides being contrary to the decision of the President conveyed in the Railway BoardI s letter dated

30.6.1984 (ibid)." It is difficult to appreciate and understand the logic behind the said reasoning. A reading of the letter dated 30^'' June, 1984, would indicate that an employeepostedto NF Railwaysis entitledto two HRAs. The first HRA is payable-asper the place of actualposting.The secondHRA is the WPiQNos.4679&6202-2015 gof15 same as paid to the said employeeat the last stationof postingbefore he was postedto the StatesofAssam,Meghalaya,Nagaland,Manipur,Tripura etc. In other words, the letter grants a concessionand indulgenceto the employeeas he is paid the HRA at the rate which was being paid at the placeofhis last posting. The amountso fixed dependsupon the basicpay being paid to the employeeat the place ofhis last posting,beforehe was transferred and posted to the States of Assam, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Manipur, Tripura, etc. This payment does not deny and the employee would get the HRA payableto him on his postingto the States of Assam, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Manipur, Tripura etc. The current HRA would accordinglydepend upon the basic pay being/drawnby him at the new place of posting. Iri this way, the employeedoes not sufferand continues to get HRA on his current basic-vpaywhile.being posted to the States of Assam, Meghalaya,Nagaland,",Mahip&^^Tripura etc. This is in terms of paragraph 1703 of the Indian RaHwayvEstablishmentCode.'By way of concession,the employeealso continuesto draw the HRA, which he was gettingat the last place of postin'gas.perthe basic pay he was then drawing. The said concession is certainly not iniquitous and does not fall foul of Article 14. It also does not fail, foul of .paragraph 1703 of the Indian Railway Establishment Code. The said paragraph does not, in fact, permit payment of two HRAs, which became payable in terms of the Railway Boardlettersdated30"" June, 1984 and 4^*^ September,1986.

¶13It is also difficult to perceive and accept the argument that payment of the second HRA on the basis of pay last drawn at the earlier place of posting is iniquitous or absurd. There is a rationale behind the said formula, which is perceptible and clear. The employee is paid additional HRA, equal to the fixed sum which he was already getting. This payment continues and is not stopped. The employee would be paid the HRA as WP(C)Nos.4679 & 6202-2015 Page 9 of15 IT applicableat the new place of postingin the States of Assam, Meghalaya, Nagaland,Manipur,Tripuraetc. The saidHRA at the new place of posting would depend upon his current/new basic pay. Fixation of pay scales etc., are matters of policy, which take into account several factors. Normally, Courts do not interfere in fiscal matters like fixing rates of HRA etc., unless the policy is ex facie arbitrary and displays apparent discrimination. The criteria for payment of two HRAs in the present case would be identical and equally apply to all employees, who get posted in the specified States. Paragraph 1703 of the Indian Railway Establishment Code quoted above shows that HRA can vary from 5% to 30% of the actual basic pay drawn. It is dependent upon the place of posting and the pay scale. Transfers are incidents of employment,and not.by way of punishrnent.If we accept the reasoning of the Tribunal, theii rates,of,HRA-should beidentical or the rate of HRA should also change if the.farhily'of the employee takes a rented accommodation at another or a different place. Mere possibility of incongruitiesin some odd situations would not make the policy/letter violativeofArticle14 ofthe Cgnstitutioh,as was observedbythe Supreme Court in State of Karnataka Another v. Mangalore UniversityNon-Teaching Employees Association & Others ((2Q){)2)3 SCC 302:- "10 The complaint-based on Article 14 of the Constitution cannotbe judgedby adoptinga doctrinaireapproachorby having regard to individual cases. It is not prudent or pragmatic to insist on a matheniatically accurate classification covering diverse situations and all possible contingencies in view of the inherent complexities involved in fixing the scales of allowances based on the places of work While formulating such rules it is difficult to envisage all situationsand facts peculiarto a few places here and there. A legislativeprovisionor an executiveorderofgeneralapplication does not become unconstitutionalmerely because, in its actual application,it turns out to be disadvantageousor inequitableto certain individuals or a small section of people. Government WP(C)Nos.4679&6202-2015 p"ggjqgf f If should not take note of individual cases of hardship and afford relief wherever such relief is genuinely needed; but the rule or the provisiondoes notbecomebador obnoxiousto Article14 for the reason that the criterion adopted in the case of an 'A' Class city is not extended to a 'B' or 'C Class city." In light of the aforesaid,the policy of the Railways as expressedin the letters cannot be held to be discriminatory or arbitrary.

¶14A reading of the order dated 15^"^ January, 2008 passed in CWJC No. 10123 of 2006, Union of India & Ors. Vs. Ashes Kiran Prasad & Anr. would indicate that the challenge in the writ petition was to the order of the CentralAdministrativeTribunaldated 1^' December,2014, by which the employee was directed to be paidTHlA for occupation of the house at Patna at the rate applicable to house reht allowance at Patha, though, the employeewas postedat Hajipur. The Gdi^noticedthat.theemployeehad been permitted to hire an accomrnodation at Patna due to paucity of government accommodation at Hajipur.' In these circumstances, the employee had submitted that he had taken a house,on rent at Patna, which belonged to a Joint Hindu Family/ Hindu' Undivided Family of which he was a member and, therefore, he was entitled to payment of HRA. Attention was drawn to one lirie in the said .order to the effect that "The House Rent Allowance for the permissible occupation of own house at Patna should commensurate with that", we would observe is not the sole basis of making the said finding and granting relief to the employee. The primary consideration was that the employee, though posted at Hajipur, Bihar, couldnot be providedaccommodationdue to paucityof government accommodationat Hajipur. It cannotbe said that this judgment or decision re-writes all principlesof HRA or has the effect of negating paragraph 1703 of the Indian Railway Establishment Code. The decision should be confined to its own facts. fVP(C)Nos.4679&6202-2015 Page11 of15

¶15There is another reason why the writ petition filed by the Union of India should succeed. As noticed above, the employee was posted and had remainedat Gauhati,from 30^^ October,2003 till 26'^ October,2007. The OA claiming the arrears was filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, in the month of December, 2013. The prayer for payment of arrears of enhanced HRA for the aforesaid period was clearly barred by limitation. Section 21 of the aforesaid Act states that a Tribunal shall not admit an applicationunder clause(a) and (b) if they are barredby limitation, i.e. not filed within one year from the date on which the final order is made, or where an appeal or representation is made as mentioned in clause (b) of sub-section(2) to section 20 and a period of six monthshas expired without final order beingvmade,,and within one year from the date of expiry of the said period of six -months. . .

¶16The employee, in view of the;aforesaid position, had relied on the decisionin UnionofIndiaand Ors. Fs. TarsemSingh,(2008)8SCC 648, which examines principles underlying continuing wrongs and recurring/successivewrongs. A "continuing Wrong" refers to a single wrongful act which causes a continuing injury. "Recurring/successive wrongs" are those which occurperio.diGally,.each wrong giving rise to a distinctand separatecause of In BalakrishnaS.P. Waghmarevs. Shree Dhyaneshwar Mahamj Sansthan, AIR 1959 SC 798, it was observedthat the very essenceof a continuingwrong is that the offending act creates a continuing source of injury and renders the doer of the act responsibleand liable for continuanceof the said injury. If the wrongful act causes an injurywhich is complete,there is no continuingwrong even thoughthe damageresultingfrom the act may continue.In this connection, it is necessaiyto draw adistinctionbetweeninjurycausedby acontinuing act and what may be describedas the effectofthe said injury. Thereafter, WP(C)Nos.4679&6202-2015 j2"j-referencewas made toM.R. Gupta Vs. Union ofIndia, (1995)5 SCC 628, wherein it is observedthat so long as an employeeis in service, a fresh cause of actionarises every month, when he is paid monthlysalaryonthe basis ofa wrong computationmade contraryto the rules and insuch cases, he would be entitledto get his pay properlyfixed for the future and the question of limitation would arise for recovery of the arrears. His consequential claims such as promotion etc. may be subject to laches/limitation. In Tarsem Singh (supra),it was held as under:- "7. To summarise,normally, a belated service related claim will be rejected on the ground of delay and laches (where remedyis soughtby filinga writpetition)or limitation(where remedy is sought by an applica;tion to the Administrative Tribunal).,One of the exceptions to the said rule is cases 5 relatingto: a continuing;;wrong.rWherea servicerelatedclaim is based on a continuingwron^ can be grantedeven if there is a long delayin; seekihg remedy, with reference to the date on which the continuing wrong commenced, if such continuing wrong creates a continuing source of injury. But there is an exception to tlie, exception. If the grievance is in respectof any orderor,;administrativedecisionwhichrelatedto or affected several-others also, arid if the re-opening of the issue would affect the settled rights'of third parties, then the claim will npt be entertained.For example, if the issue relates to payment or re-fixation of pay or pension, relief may be granted in spite of delay as it does not affect the rights of third parties. But if the claim involved issues relating to seniorityor promotion etc., affecting others, delay would render the claim stale and doctrine of laches/limitation will be applied. In so far as the consequential relief of recovery of arrears for a past period, the principles relating to recurring/successive wrongs will apply. As a consequence. High Courts will restrict the consequential relief relating to arrears normally to a period of three years prior to the date of filing of the writ petition." The aforesaid decision does not support the employee and would go against him. The present case is not of a continuing cause of action. As noticed above, a distinction has to be drawn between an injury caused by a WP(C)Nos. 4679 & 6202-2015 \ > wrongful act and what may be describedas the effect of the said injury. The alleged wrongful act, as per the employee,had occurredduring the period30'^ October,2003 till 26'^ October,2007 when the "correct"HRA was not paid to him. There was no continuanceor recurrencethereafter, thoughthe effect of the "short"paymentwould continue,till paymentas claimed,is made. The OA in questionwas filed only in December,2013 and was, therefore, clearly barred by limitation. Even if there was recurrencereccurrence,limitationofthreeyearswouldapply. ^

¶17We are conscious and aware that the plea of limitationwas not specificallyraised by the Union of India in their reply, which to us was perplexingand confusing..Whatisj however,apparent,is thatthe employee in the OA had mixed^p two caus^s/of^action,which includedthe second reliefregardingthe payable.consequentto the employees postingto Jaipurin North-WesternRailway,witheffectfrom October,2007. The secondreliefprayeris the subjectmattetof W.P. (C) No.4679/2015titled AshesKiranPrasadvs. Union ofIndia&Ors. We find thatthe impugned order is silent and does not exarnine.and.' decide the contentionsraised before us on the questionof paymentof double HRA to the employeeat Jaipur.We do not know whetherthe:said contention,in so many words as raisedbefore us, was in fact raisedbeforethe Tribunal. However,we can treatthe prayeras rejectedas the same has not beenallowed,albeitwithout discussion and elucidation.

¶18In these circumstances,we wouldremitthe questionraisedbeforeus relatingto paymentofHRA for the periodafter October,2007 to the Tribunal, for a fresh decision on merits. We clarify that we have not expressedany opinionon the said aspect. Thus, an orderofremandwould be justified,for the Tribunalis the court of the first instance. We would, however, clarifythat the questionof paymentof HRA with regard to the WP(C)Nos.4679&6202-2015 Page U of15 -< period between 30'" October, 2003 to 26® October, 2007, when the employeewas postedat C-auhatiin NF Railwaywouldnot be examinedas we have allowedWP(C) No. 6202/2015filed by the Union of India and held that the employee Ashes Kiran Prasad would not be entitled to enhanced or higher HRA.

¶19The writ petitionsare accordinglydisposedof. In the facts of the presentcases,therewill be no orderas to costs. FEBRUARY^i,2016 NA/ssn (SANJIVKHANNA) JUDGE AZIRI) % JUisGE WPiQNos. 4679 & 6202-2015 $-42 & 43 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +. W.P.(C) 4679/2015 ASHES KIRAN PRASAD Petitioner Through: Mr. V.S.R. Krishna, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Respondent Through: Ms. Ayushi Kiran, Adv. + W.P.(C) 6202/2015 UNION OF INDIA & ORS Petitioner Through: . versus ASHES KIRAN PRASAD Respondent Through: Mr. V.S.R. Krishna, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMIWAZIRI ORDER %

15.03.2016 V y Typographicalerrorin paragraphNo. 18 ofourjudgmentdated

29.02.2016 has been corrected and initialled in today's date. Corrected copy will be uploaded on the website. -1U SANJIV KHANNA, J NAJMI WAZIRI, J MARCH 15,2016/acm

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(0 6202/2015 Reservedon: 29^*^ January,2016 Dateofdecision:^'^'^ebruary,2016 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner Through: Mr. V.S.R. Krishna, Advocate. versus ASHES KIRAN PRASAD Respondent Through: Mr. Ravi Sikri, Senior Advocate with Ms. Ayushi Kiran, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMIWAZIRI