- (1.) Heard Mr. Anupam Verma, petitioner-in-person, Mr. S.B. Pandey, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India for respondents No. 1 to 3 and Mr. O.P. Srivastava, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Virendra Kumar Dubey, learned Counsel for the respondent No.4.
(2.) The petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India claiming following reliefs : "i. to issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the termination order dated 15/12/2016 (Para 16, Annexure 08), Because - a) That in view of the para 12 & 21 (a) (Annexure-4 referred) hereinabove the entire Disciplinary Proceedings against the petitioner initiated by Shri Vinod Kumar Verma functioning as CAE's Director IGRUA and Steering Committee are de-hors the Rules of the Society, Memorandum of Association and also the Conduct and Discipline Rules which have been framed with the approval of the Government of India. b) termination is ultra vires to the provisions contained in the letter dated 22/12/2015 for termination of the students from the academy {Para 14 & 21 (b) Annexure 5}. c) Petitioner's termination is an outcome of Criminal Conspiracy {Para 17 & 18 of the Writ Petition (Annexure 10)}. d) petitioner has almost completed requirement of issue of Commercial Pilot License {Para 21 (c), Annexure 11 & 12} e) petitioner has completed requirement of joining instructions at IGRUA {Para 21 (d), Annexure 13} f) Petitioner has completed requirement of Training and Procedure Manual approved by respondent No.3 {Para 21 (e) Annexure 14} g) Petitioner has not been given training and have been discriminated vis-à-vis Flt cadet Niladri Sarkar and others flight Cadets whose performance was far below the petitioner {Para 21 (f), (h) & (i) Annexure 15 & 16}. h) The performance of Petitioner is far beyond that of nephew of respondent No.4 who was progressed for flying training without having passed any ground subjects and without minimum attendance. {Para 21 (h), Annexure 16} i) Petitioner's Training was terminated just within 11 months whereas time framed by DGCA is of 5 years. {Para 21 (g)} ii. to issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding the respondent No.1, under rule 160 to extend validity of Aviation Metrology paper passed by the petitioner for the period equal of 18 months (i.e. date of illegal relegation to till date), beyond the date of expiry i.e. 12/08/2017 as the passing of the said paper could not serve its purpose on account of illegalacts of commissions by respondent no. 1 & 3. iii. to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding the respondent No.1 complete petitioner training expeditiously. iv. to issue, any other writ or order or direction in present circumstances of the case. v. To award the cost of the writ in favor of the petitioner."
(3.) Mr. O.P. Srivastava, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Virendra Kumar Dubey, learned Counsel for the respondent No.4 has raised a preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of the present writ petition and has submitted that as the petitioner failed in 12 subjects out of 13, his training of Commercial Pilot License was terminated vide order dated 3.6.2016 against which the petitioner has preferred writ petition No. 24933 (M/B) of 2016. He has submitted that the aforesaid termination order dated 3.6.2016 was subject to ratification by the Steering Committee. The Steering Committee, vide order dated 15.12.2016, ratified the order dated 3.6.2016 and the same was also served upon the petitioner as well as placed before this Court on 19.12.2016. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court considered the validity of the termination order dated 3.6.2016 as well as order dated 15.12.2016 and vide judgment and order dated 13.2.2017, disposed of writ petition No. 24933 (M/B) of 2016 along with writ petition Nos. 3903 (M/B) of 2014, 4919 (M/B) of 2016 and 2952 of 2016 (M/B) filed by the petitioner with liberty to the petitioner to approach any other Flying Training Organization and Joint Director was desired by the Court to help the petitioner in getting admission in any of the remaining Flying Training Organization. The DGCA was also to help the petitioner in getting the remaining fee reimbursed from the Ministry, taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has arrayed all the officers from one to eleven by name and these are the officers who are to instruct and teach the petitioner in Udan Academy and even if everybody tried to be fair the atmosphere of the training institute will be filled with apprehension and anxiety and both sides will be apprehensive of reaction of the other and the atmosphere will not be conducive for the training of commercial pilots.;