Petitioner challenged rejection of his representation for seniority refixation after a sealed-cover promotion procedure ended with only censure. The Court held the impugned communication was bald of reasons and set it aside without commenting on merits, directing fresh consideration by a speaking order.
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.
$~77
RAJESH KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Satwik Misra, Ms. Gunjan Dogra & Ms. Devashree, Advocates.
versus
AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Anshul Rai & Ms. Mallika Ranjan, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN
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 15/11/2025 at 12:52:48
made a representation for refixation of the seniority in view of the fact that only a punishment of censure was given to the petitioner. The representation was rejected vide communication dated 02.07.2024.
AVNEESH JHINGAN, J
NOVEMBER 11, 2025/ ‘JK’
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 15/11/2025 at 12:52:48
1 issue framed by the court
Was the rejection of the petitioner's representation for refixation of seniority, being a non-speaking order, sustainable?
Rajesh Kumar
Airports Authority of India
Avneesh Jhingan
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
