This order awards no substantive relief as the court expressed no opinion on merits. Instead, it directs the respondents to consider the petition as a representation and decide within eight weeks.
Petition treated as representation to be decided within 8 weeks; no opinion expressed on merits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~83
Through: Ms. Saahila Lamba, Adv.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Farman Ali, SPC with Mr. Hussain Adil Taqvi, Ms. Usha Jamnal and Ms. Harshita Chaturvedi, Advs.
%
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR O R D E R 02.12.2024
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 12/12/2024 at 11:58:32
dispose of the present petition by directing that the respondents shall consider the contents of the present petition as a representation of the petitioners and decide the same within a period of eight weeks from today. In case, the petitioners are held entitled to a relief, the same shall be released to the petitioners. In case, the decision taken is adverse to the interest of the petitioners, it shall be open to the petitioners to challenge the same, in accordance with the law. We make it clear that we have not express any opinion on the merits of the present case.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J
SHALINDER KAUR, J
DECEMBER 2, 2024 /ss/sk Click here to check corrigendum, if any
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 12/12/2024 at 11:58:32
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioners are entitled to a direction treating their petition as a representation for pay upgrading.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sh. Tejbir Singh Dagar and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors.Referred¶8
Sh. Tejbir Singh Dagar and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors., 2014 SCC OnLine Del 45 · Who else cites this
Yudhister Mudgal & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors.Referred¶8
Yudhister Mudgal & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors., 2015 SCC OnLine Del 8493 · Who else cites this
Arjun Dass & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors.Referred¶8
Arjun Dass & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors., 2024 SCC OnLine Del 6637 · Who else cites this
Shrinivas & Ors.
Union of India & Ors.
Navin Chawla
Shalinder Kaur
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
