Petitioner, already appointed by the respondent on identical terms as a similarly situated applicant whose CAT OA was allowed, sought dismissal of his writ petition as infructuous.
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.
$~18
ARUN YADAV ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Swapnil Aeron, Advocate. versus CENTER FOR PERSONNEL TALENT MANAGEMENT THROUGH DIRECTOR ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Jatin Singh, Mr. Keshav Segal, Mr. Shivam Gaur, Mr. Kshitij Joshi and Mr. Aryan Kumar, Advocates.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA O R D E R % 16.02.2024 (The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid Mode) 1. Mr. Swapnil Aeron, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in terms of the order dated 22.11.2023 in O.A. No.1710/2023, the Central Administrative Tribunal (‘CAT’), Principal Bench, New Delhi, had allowed the O.A. of another similarly situated person.
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 22/02/2024 at 12:56:52
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J
FEBRUARY 16, 2024/ nd
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 22/02/2024 at 12:56:52
Arun Yadav
Center for Personnel Talent Management through Director
Tushar Rao Gedela
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
