Dismissed¶¶21

Ramesh Kumar v. Bses Yamuna Power Ltd. and Anr.

Service law – disciplinary penalty

Delhi HC17 Jan 2025W.P.(C)/8761/2019

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court, W.P.(C) 8761/2019, Ramesh Kumar v. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. and Anr., decided 17.01.2025 by Justice Prateek Jalan. Dismissal of writ petition challenging removal from service; claim for parity in punishment with retired employees (Kailash Nath, Satish Kumar Bhalla) punished with pension reduction rejected; no statute or precedent cited; relates to disciplinary action following criminal conviction and appeal disposed on 10.01.2014.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner's case is not identical to that of Mr. Satish Kumar Bhalla and Mr. Kailash Nath, as they had already retired from service when penalty was imposed and the penalty of removal was not available against them. ¶¶15

Ramesh Kumar Vs Bses Yamuna Power Ltd. and Anr. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~3

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 8761/2019 RAMESH KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Ms. Priti Kumari, Advocates.

¶4

versus

¶5

BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD. AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sandeep Prabhakar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vikas Mehta, Advocate for R-1. Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, SC for GNCTD with Mr. N.K. Singh, Ms. Laavanya Kaushik, Ms. Aliza Alam, Mr. Mohnish Sehrawat, Mr. Amitaj Chadha, Advocates for R-2. Ms. Manika Tripathy, Mr. Gautam Yadav and Mr. Sanjay Singh Rathore, Advocates for DDA.

¶6

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

¶7

O R D E R

¶8

% 17.01.2025

¶9

In furtherance to the order dated 10.01.2025, BSES – Yamuna Power Ltd [“BSES”] has filed an affidavit dated 13.01.2025, in which it is stated that Mr. Kailash Nath and Mr. Satish Kumar Bhalla retired upon attaining the age of superannuation, on 13.06.2001 and 31.07.2012 respectively.

¶10

It is stated that penalty orders were passed against them by the respondent on 27.05.2014, after disposal of their appeals against

¶11

W.P.(C) 8761/2019

¶12

Page 1 of 3

¶13

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 24/01/2025 at 15:34:20

¶14

conviction by this Court on 10.01.2014. As the said two employees had already retired, the punishment imposed upon them was by way of reduction in pension, whereas the petitioner was still in service, and was, therefore, removed by the order of the respondents dated 17.07.2014, reiterated by the impugned order dated 04.07.2017.

¶15

As far as Mr. Satish Kumar Bhalla is concerned, this Court has already noted the submission of BSES in the order dated 13.12.2019 to the effect that remedy of removal could not be imposed as he had superannuated by the time action came to be taken against him. 4. In the present writ petition, the petitioner’s case at the highest is that the punishment imposed upon him should be reduced in parity with the cases of Mr. Satish Kumar Bhalla and Mr. Kailash Nath. It is clear from the contents of the additional affidavit, that the case of the petitioner is not identical to the cases of the said two persons, as they had already retired from the service, and the penalty of removal was not available, so far as they are concerned.

¶16

Mr. Amitesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that since Mr. Satish Kumar Bhalla was still in service when the order of conviction was passed on 28.02.2011, he ought to have been removed from service during the pendency of the appeal filed by him before this Court. However, such a submission does not find place in the writ petition, and the person concerned has not even been made a party to the writ petition. To the contrary, the relief sought by the by the petitioner is that the punishment imposed upon him be reduced, so that he is treated at par with Mr. Satish Kumar Bhalla and Mr. Kailash Nath. This relief, for the reasons aforesaid, is unmerited.

¶17

W.P.(C) 8761/2019

¶18

Page 2 of 3

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

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 24/01/2025 at 15:34:20

¶21

The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed.

PRATEEK JALAN, J

JANUARY 17, 2025

VLD/kb/

W.P.(C) 8761/2019

Page 3 of 3

This is a digitally signed order.

¶28

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 24/01/2025 at 15:34:20

Ramesh Kumar v. Bses Yamuna Power Ltd. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Kumar v. Bses Yamuna Power Ltd. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prakash Industries Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 30, Delhi & Anr.

M/S Royal Security Services Vs Jaipal Singh and Ors.

Fci Handling Workers Union Vs UOI & Anr.

Rajesh Gomes Vs New Delhi Municipal Council (Ndmc) and Ors.

M/S Image Filling Station Vs National Highway Logistics Management Limited & Anr.

Staff Selection Commission & Ors. Vs Atul Baghel

Ethenic Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mr Kg Somani Erstwhile Liquidator & Ors.

Naib Sub Tej Pal Singh Vs UOI and Ors.

Geeta Panwar and Ors. Vs Govt. of N.C.T. Delhi and Ors.

Ayodhya Kumar Rajbhar Vs Lok Sabha Secretariat and Ors.

Tarzan (India) Chemical Industries Vs O.P Jindal

Brij Mohan Vs Kuldeep Singh

Parminder Singh Vs the Food Corporation of India and Ors.

St. Margaret Education Society Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.