Sandeep Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Sandeep Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of with liberty reserved to the petitioner to challenge the respondents' Order dated 27.2.2025 in accordance with law; interim relief of Order dated 25.2.2025 continued for ten days; pending application (CM APPL. 11704/2025) also stands disposed of.

Issue for consideration

How the petition was to be dealt with now that the respondents, instead of acting on the prayer, had filed a short affidavit enclosing their reasoned Order dated 27.2.2025 declining the request for technical resignation. +1 more

Court's answer

Since the respondents have furnished reasons for not accepting the technical resignation request through their Order dated 27.2.2025 (filed along with a short affidavit), the petitioner must challenge that order in accordance with law; the present petition is disposed of with liberty reserved to the petitioner for such challenge.

Ratio / Principle

The interim relief granted to the petitioner vide Order dated 25.2.2025 shall continue for a period of ten days to enable him to avail of his remedies.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Navin Chawla & Manoj Jain, JJ.), Order dated 10.03.2025 in W.P.(C) 2478/2025 (Sandeep Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.): The petitioner sought (i) quashing of non-speaking Order No.252/5/08583 dated 18.02.2025 not approving his Technical Resignation w.e.f. 25.02.2025, said to violate Rule 26 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 and DOPT OM No. 28011/1/2013-Estt (C) dt. 23.12.2013, and compliance with the order in Writ Petition (C) No. 2115 dt. 19.02.2025; (ii) release on Technical Resignation per NOC dt. 19.08.2025 approved by Respondent No.3, invoking Rule 21 & Rule 27 of the Coast Guard (General) Rules, 1986 read with Rule 26 CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021; and (iii) Respondent No.5 keeping a post vacant per offer of appointment dt. 25.11.2025. After notice (25.02.2025), respondents filed a short affidavit enclosing their reasoned Order dated 27.2.2025 declining the request. The Court held that the petitioner would have to challenge that order in accordance with law and disposed of the petition with liberty so reserved; interim relief of Order dt. 25.2.2025 was continued for ten days; the pending application was likewise disposed of. Respondent No.5, though served, remained unrepresented. No precedents cited; matter not decided on merits.

$~51

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- W.P.(C) 2478/2025 & CM APPL. 11704/2025

SANDEEP KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr.Raj Singh, Adv.

versus

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr.Rajnish Kumar Gaind, SPC with Mr.Himanshu Gupta, Ms.Charu Rajput, Advs. for R-1 to 4.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

O R D E R 10.03.2025

% 10.03.2025 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner, praying for the

following reliefs:

“a) To issue a writ of mandamus or Certiorari and or any other suitable writ, order or direction to the Respondents for quashing non speaking order No.252/5/08583 dated 18.02.2025 for not approving the Technical Resignation from the service w.e.f. 25.02.2025 being in violation of the Rule 26 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 and relevant DOPT OM No. 28011/1/2013-Estt (C) of dated 23.12.2013; and to direct Respondents to comply the order passed in the Writ Petition (C) No. 2115 dated 19.02.2025 in accordance with rules; and

b) To issue a writ of mandamus or Certiorari and or any other suitable writ,

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 18/03/2025 at 11:46:42

order or direction to the Respondents for release of the Petitioner on Technical Resignation in terms of the No objection Certificate dated 19.08.2025 issued to the Petitioner with the approval of the Respondent No. 3 in accordance with the Rule 21 & Rule 27 of the Coast Guard (General) Rules, 1986 read with Rule 26 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 with all consequential benefits accruing to the Petitioner in a time bound manner,

c) To issue a writ of mandamus or Certiorari and or any other suitable writ, order or direction to the Respondent 5 for keeping one post vacant in accordance with the offer of appointment dated 25.11.2025 issued to the Petitioner till the outcome of the writ petition.”

On 25.02.2025, this Court had issued notice of this petition to the respondents.

Pursuant to the above, the respondents have filed a short affidavit, inter alia, enclosing therewith a copy of the Order dated 27.2.2025, thereby giving reasons for not accepting the request of the petitioner for technical resignation.

The petitioner would have to challenge the said order in accordance with law.

Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the same in accordance with law.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent no. 5 has been served with the notice of the present petition.

Inspite of service, none appears for the respondent no. 5.

The interim relief granted to the petitioner vide Order dated 25.2.2025 shall continue for a period of ten days for the

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 18/03/2025 at 11:46:42

petitioner to avail of his remedies.

The pending application also stands disposed of.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J

MANOJ JAIN, J

MARCH 10, 2025 RN/DG

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 18/03/2025 at 11:46:42