High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 04 DEL CK 0192

VIKAS & ORS vs EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION & ANR

Delhi High Court · Decided on 20 April 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
SUNIL GAUR
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
W.P.(C) 3453 of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

24 paragraphs · 487 words

SUNIL GAUR ,J.

1.In the first round of litigation, petitioners’ No.2 to 6 & 17 had approached this Court for rendering compulsory service in terms of Bond executed

by them. This Court vide order of 23rd March, 2018 (Annexure P-3) had directed respondents to consider the case of petitioners No.2 to 6 & 17 for

permitting them to render compulsory service under the Service Bond.Â

2.Learned counsel for petitioners submits that when the order of 23rd March, 2018 (Annexure P-3) was passed, it was not known to said petitioners

that their bonds have been discharged. In this petition, dental graduates of first batch and second batch are aggrieved by Communication of 4th

January, 2016 and 17th November, 2016 (Annexure P-4 colly.) as vide these Communications, they have been released from the condition of

rendering compulsory service under the Bond. Reliance is placed upon Memorandum of 2nd February, 2018 (Annexure P-2), which required

rendering of compulsory service under the service bond as an essential requirement.Â

3.It is submitted by petitioners’ counsel that petitioners have been orally informed that the third batch i.e. of the year 2017, is being considered for

rendering compulsory service under the Service Bond as their bonds are still valid. It is submitted that Memorandum of 2nd February, 2018 (Annexure

P-2) has to be uniformly applied to all the batches and cannot be confined to third or fourth batch, as to permit so, would be discriminatory. It is further

submitted that in terms of order of 23rd March, 2018 (Annexure P-3), petitioners No.2 to 6 and 17 have already made a Representation on 2nd April,

2018 and its fate is not yet known to them.Â

4.Despite service of advance notice, none appears on behalf of respondents.Â

5.In the facts and circumstance of this case, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of this petition with direction to first respondent to comply with the

order of 23rd March, 2018 (Annexure P-3) without going into the aspect as to whether bonds have been discharged or not and the fate of the

Representation of 2nd April, 2018 be made known to petitioners No. 2 to 6 & 17 within the timeline as indicated in the order of 23rd March, 2018. So

far as remaining petitioners are concerned, it is stated by petitioners’ counsel that even the remaining petitioners have made similar Representation

on 2nd April, 2018 to first respondent. If it is so, then first respondent shall pass a speaking order on the Representations of the remaining petitioners

i.e. petitioners No.1 & 7 to 16, within a period of six weeks from today and the fate of the said Representations be made known to these petitioners

within a week thereafter, so that petitioners may avail of the remedies as available in law, if need be.

6.With aforesaid directions, this petition and the applications are disposed of.

Copy of this order be given dasti to learned counsel for petitioners. Â