VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Delhi High Court 2015 › High Court of Delhi

Cns Officers Guild ( Registered) v. Y.P.Gautam

Court
High Court of Delhi
Decided
23 December 2015
Bench
Rajiv Sahai Endlawauthor
Case no.
CONT.CAS(C) 746/2014

Judgment

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J DECEMBER 23, 2015 "gsr"..

Case details

Parties and counsel

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 23rd December, 2015 + W.P.(C) 5820/2007 C.N.S. OFFICER'S GUILD (REGD) ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Ashish Dixit & Mr. Sandeep Chatterjee, Advs. Versus CHAIRMAN , AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Digvijay Rai & Mr. Syed Hassan Taher, Advs. for R-1 to 3. Mr. Anjana Gosain, Adv. for UOI. Mr. Abhinav Vasisht, Sr. Adv. with Mr. S.M. Sundaram & Mr. K.V. Balakrishnan, Advs. for R-6. AND + CONT.CAS(C) 746/2014 CNS OFFICERS GUILD (REGISTERED) ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Ashish Dixit & Mr. Sandeep Chatterjee, Advs. Versus Y.P.GAUTAM ..... Respondent/Alleged Contemnor Through: Mr. Abhinav Vasisht, Sr. Adv. with Mr. S.M. Sundaram & Mr. K.V. Balakrishnan, Advs. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW W.P.(C) 5820/2007 1. On 30th October, 2015, the following order was passed in W.P.(C) No.5820/2007: "1. The petitioner, claiming to be an Association of Communication, Navigation and Surveillance Officers of the respondent Airport Authority of India (AAI) has filed this petition, (i) seeking a mandamus to the respondent AAI to treat the petitioner Association at par with other Cadre Based Officers" Association of the respondent AAI and to provide to the petitioner Association the same facilities as respondent AAI is providing to the other such Associations; and, (ii) seeking mandamus to the respondent AAI to formulate policy for recognition of Association and for interaction with the same. 2. After hearing the senior counsel for the petitioner Association to some extent it transpires, (i) that though earlier there was only one Association of all Officers of the respondent AAI but now there are several Cadre Based Associations; (ii) none of the said Associations has been granted recognition by the respondent AAI; and, (iii) the grievance of the petitioner Association is that while the other Associations are provided office infrastructure and immunity from transfer of their office bearers, no such facilities have been provided to the petitioner Association. 3. It has been enquired from the senior counsel for the petitioner Association as to how the petitioner can be granted any relief by this Court without the petitioner Association establishing a right under the Rules & Regulations of respondent AAI to the said right / facility. It has been put to him, how, merely because the respondent AAI, contrary to its Rules & Regulations or without there being a right in any such Association to any of the said facilities has been granting the same, would entitle the petitioner Association to a relief to which it does not have a right and the only order which can be passed is a direction to the respondent AAI to deny the said facilities to other Associations also. 4. The senior counsel for the petitioner Association has then argued that it is for this reason only that the petitioner Association has claimed the second of the aforesaid reliefs, for commanding the respondent AAI to formulate the policy for recognition of Association and for interaction with the same. On further enquiry as to what is the liability of the respondent AAI to grant such recognition, attention is drawn to Office Memorandum dated 9th November, 1993 of the Department of Personnel & Training (DOPT), Government of India in this regard contending that the said Office Memorandum / Notification is applicable to respondent AAI also. 5. The counsel for the respondent AAI however states that the aforesaid Office Memorandum does not apply to the respondent AAI. 6. The senior counsel for the petitioner Association has however shown the Transfer Policy of AAI, Clause 10(b) of the General Guidelines whereunder exempts from transfer office bearers of recognised Union / Association. It is argued that since the Guidelines refer to recognised Union / Association, there has to be a recognised Union / Association. Attention in this r

Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.