DEEPAK SHARMA vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~88 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 9490/2025 & CM APPL. 40054/2025 DEEPAK SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Abhay Kumar Bhargava, Mr. Satyaarth Sinha and Ms. Khushi, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Naginder Benipal, SPC, Ms Vidhi Gupta, GP, Mr. Ankit Siwach, Advocates with Mr Ajay Pal, Law Officer, CRPF, Mr Athurv, Inspector, CRPF and Mr. Ramniwas Yadav, CRPF CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL ORDER (ORAL) % 10.07.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J. 1. The petitioner challenges his transfer to Hyderabad. Amongst other contentions, he contends that his son is epileptic and is a student of Class 10. 2. The petitioner is also placing reliance on the judgment dated 9 August 2024 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in WP (C) 11036/20241, in which, in similar circumstances, the Court had directed the writ petition to be treated as a representation and a 1 Dhirendra Singh v UOI Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) 9490/2025 Digitally Signed By:AJIT Page 1 of 2 KUMAR Signing Date:14.07.2025 16:28:33 reasoned and speaking order taken thereon within a time fixed by the Court with the right reserved to the petitioner to challenge the said decision if it was adverse to him. 3. Accordingly, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents to treat the writ petition as a representation and take a decision thereon within a period of four weeks from today. The decision, as and when taken, would be communicated to the petitioner forthwith. In case the decision is adverse to the petitioner, its implementation would remain in abeyance for a period of one week from its communication, so that the petitioner would have an opportunity to seek legal remedies, if so advised. 4. Needle