Disposed

Sandeep Kumar v. Union of India and Others

Delhi HC9 Sept 2024W.P.(C)/12618/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Delhi disposed of this writ petition challenging the termination of the petitioner's services. Instead of adjudicating on the merits, the court directed the Nodal Ministry to decide the petitioner's subsequent representation within a specified timeframe, allowing further remedies thereafter. The pending applications were also disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No. 1 to decide the Petitioner's representation dated 12.08.2024 within six weeks and communicate the decision.

Sandeep Kumar Vs Union of India and Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~93

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 12618/2024 and CM APPL. Nos. 52427/2024 and 52428/2024

¶4

SANDEEP KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Durgesh Gupta, Advocate.

¶5

versus

¶6

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS .....Respondent Through: Ms. Pratima N. Lakra, CGSC with Ms. Pinky Panwar, Government Pleader and Mr. Prakhar Vashisth and Mr. Chandan Prajapati, Advocates for Respondent No.1/UOI.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

¶9

O R D E R % 09.09.2024

¶10

This writ petition has been preferred on behalf of the Petitioner seeking the following reliefs:

¶11

“i) Petition Under Article 226 Of The Constitution Of India For Issuance Of Writ Of Mandamus Challenging The Validity And Legality Of Order/S Dated 11.12.2023 Passed By Disciplinary Authority And Order Dated 25.5.2024 Dismissing/Termination The Services Of The Petitioner; On The Ground Of Being Ex-Facie Illegal, Arbitrary, Unreasonable And Therefore, Being Violative Of Article 14 And 19 (1) (G) Of The Constitution Of India

¶12

ii) Issuance Of Writ Of Mandamus Or Any Other Appropriate Writ/ Order Directing The Respondent No. 1 To Decide The Representation Of The Petitioner And To Direct The Respondents No. 2 To 3 To Recall The Order Of Dismissal Of Service Of The Petitioner And To Reinstate The Petitioner In Employment Of Respondent No. 2 And 3 With Full Back Wagesand

¶13

iii) Award costs in the favour of Petitioner and against the Respondent for having acted illegally, arbitrarily and with malice / bias in its overall conduct.”

¶14

W.P.(C) 12618/2024 Page 1 of 3

¶15

This is a digitally signed order.

¶16

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/07/2025 at 02:07:06

¶17

Petitioner joined Respondent No. 2/Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL) in 1996 as a Senior Mobile Operator and continued to work there till he was dismissed from service vide order dated 11.12.2023 pursuant to a disciplinary inquiry initiated by a charge sheet dated 01.06.2021. Petitioner filed an appeal against the dismissal order, which was dismissed by the Appellate Authority by an order dated 25.05.2024 against which the Petitioner preferred a representation to Respondent No. 1 on 14.08.2024 being the Nodal Ministry of Respondent No. 2.

¶18

Learned counsel for the Petitioner fairly submits that albeit there is no provision for making a representation to Respondent No. 1 under the applicable Rules, however, being the Nodal Ministry Petitioner has represented against his dismissal order which is unfair and unjust and has taken away the only source of livelihood of the Petitioner despite having served dedicatedly for over two decades with Respondent No. 2. In these circumstances, learned counsel submits that Petitioner would be satisfied at this stage if a direction is issued to Respondent No. 1 to decide the representation after looking into the alleged illegalities in the disciplinary proceeding and the dismissal order.

¶19

Issue notice.

¶20

Ms. Pratima N. Lakra, learned CGSC accepts notice on behalf of Respondent No.1 and submits that she has not received a copy of the writ petition.

¶21

Let another copy of the representation be handed over to learned CGSC for Respondent No.1 by counsel for Petitioner during the course of the day.

¶22

In view of the limited submission made by counsel for the Petitioner

¶23

W.P.(C) 12618/2024 Page 2 of 3

¶24

This is a digitally signed order.

¶25

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/07/2025 at 02:07:06

¶26

and without entering into merits of the case, at this stage, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to Respondent No.1 to decide the representation dated 12.08.2024 within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of this order. The decision shall be communicated to the Petitioner within one week of the decision and Petitioner will be at liberty to take recourse to appropriate remedies, in accordance with law. Pending applications also stand disposed of.

¶27

JYOTI SINGH, J

¶28

SEPTEMBER 9, 2024 B.S. Rohella/shivam

¶29

W.P.(C) 12618/2024 Page 3 of 3

¶30

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/07/2025 at 02:07:06

Sandeep Kumar v. Union of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Kumar v. Union of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Shahvez Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Manoj Kumar Sharma Vs Mmtc Limited

Gurdeep Kaur Vs Guru Harkrishan Public School and Ors.

Bijoy Kurian Philip Vs Food Corporation of India, through Its Chairman-Cum & Ors.

Smilax Healthcare Drug Co. Vs Union of India & Anr.

Gunprit Singh and Ors. Vs MCD and Ors.

Union Public Service Commission Vs Siddhartha Bishnoi

Sartaj Singh Chahal Vs Union of India and Ors.

Manoj Kumar Sharma Vs Mmtc Limited

Gurdeep Kaur Vs Guru Harkrishan Public School and Ors.

Bijoy Kurian Philip Vs Food Corporation of India, through Its Chairman-Cum & Ors.

Sh. Mohan Singh Vs Lok Sabha Secretariat and Ors.

Guru Harkrishan Public School Staff Welfare Association Vs the Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Inderjeet Singh Vs Kamala Nehru College & Ors.