RUMA PAL, D.P.MOHAPATRA, K.T.THOMAS
Union Of India – Appellant
Versus
R. P. Yadav: Raj Kumar – Respondent
JUDGMENT
D.P. Mohapatra J.-Leave granted.
2. The question that arises for determination in these appeals is whether an Artificer Apprentice of Indian Nevy who has been given a re-engagement for a certain period after obtaining his consent for it is entitled to withdraw the consent and demand his release from the force as of right? Another question which also arises is what bearing the decision of this Court in Anuj Kumar Dey and Another v. Union of India and Others1 on the above question.
3. In the appeal arising from SLP (C) No. 9839 of 1999, the respondent R.P. Yadav has already been released from the force in compliance with the direction of the Delhi High Court in the impugned judgment. Indeed in the Order dated 14.2.2000, this Court recorded the/submission of Mr. Soli J. Sorabjee, learned Attorney General for India, that so far as the respondent R.P. Yadav is concerned, the Union of India is only interested in having the question of law decided and even if it is decided in favour of the Union of India, they will not deny the benefit which R.P. Yadav has claimed in this petition. The period of re-engagement granted in the case of R.P. Yadav has also expired. But in the case of Raj
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.