$~26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 772/2018 TILAK RAJ SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Aarati Mahajan Shedha, Adv. with Ms. Manushi Prajapati, Adv.

versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondent Through: Ms. Anju Gupta and Mr. Roshan Lal Goel, Advs. for R-1, 2 & 3.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL JUDGMENT (ORAL)

% 17.01.2025 AJAY DIGPAUL, J.

1. The relevant facts that emerged from the pleadings are as follows:

The petitioner, who is a person with disability, was selected as Upper Division Clerk in the Department of Income Tax in the Divyangjan quota. In July 2012, the petitioner made a declaration under Rule 6 of the Central Civil Services (Leave Travel Concession) Rules, 1988, [“LTC Rules”, hereinafter] for going to Trivandrum. On 17.08.2012, under Rule 15(i) of LTC Rules an advance of Rs. 18,000/- and 10 days leave encashment of Rs. 9339/- was paid to the petitioner.

2. The petitioner vide letter dated 04.04.2013 sought a change in destination to Goa via Bombay and by road on car instead of train due Signature Not Verified

Signed By:MEENU WP(C) 772/2018 Page 1 of 8

to his physical disability. The request for change in desti