Disposed¶20

Ritu Sood and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.

Delhi HC4 Feb 2026W.P.(C)/5886/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Parity with connected case Dr. Ashutosh Dev Kaushik v. Union of India and Anr., W.P.(C) 9548/2017; disposal in terms of order dated 23.09.2024; consent for absorption in NIDM pursuant to notice dated 11.09.2017; counting past service from date of initial appointment; regularisation; consequential benefits including promotion and pension; reasoned decision by Respondents within three months; liberty to avail further legal remedies; W.P.(C) 5886/2018 Ritu Sood and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.; Sanjeev Narula, J.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of in terms of the order dated 23.09.2024 in W.P.(C) 9548/2017; Respondents to pass a reasoned decision in accordance with that order within three months; Petitioners at liberty to pursue appropriate legal remedies if grievances unaddressed; all pending applications disposed. ¶20

Ritu Sood and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the Petitioners, who (unlike the petitioner in W.P.(C) 9548/2017) had given consent for absorption in NIDM pursuant to the notice dated 11.09.2017, are entitled to the benefit of the directions issued on 23.09.2024 in that case, including consideration of the effect of their having given such consent, with reference to counting past service from initial appointment for regularisation and consequential benefits.

¶17

Court's answer

The present petition is disposed of in terms of the order dated 23.09.2024 passed in W.P.(C) 9548/2017.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

The Respondents shall pass a reasoned decision in accordance with the order dated 23.09.2024 in W.P.(C) 9548/2017 within a period of three months.

¶18

Key takeaways

The issue regarding the effect of the Petitioners having given consent for absorption in NIDM is to be considered by the competent authority while taking a decision, in terms of the directions issued by this Court on 23.09.2024.ratio¶17
The Petitioners shall be at liberty to avail appropriate legal remedies, if so advised, in the event the decision of the competent authority does not address their grievances.obiter¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Sanjeev Narula, J.) disposed of W.P.(C) 5886/2018 (Ritu Sood and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.) in terms of its earlier order dated 23.09.2024 in the connected matter W.P.(C) 9548/2017 (Dr. Ashutosh Dev Kaushik v. Union of India and Anr.), which had been passed without entering into the merits while directing NIDM to consider whether the petitioner therein was entitled to count past service from the date of initial appointment for regularisation and consequential benefits, including promotion and pension. Recording the common ground that the only distinction between the Petitioners and Dr. Kaushik was that the latter had not consented to absorption in NIDM pursuant to the notice dated 11.09.2017 whereas the present Petitioners had consented, the Court held that the effect of their consent is to be considered by the competent authority while deciding in terms of the 23.09.2024 directions. The Respondents were directed to pass a reasoned decision within three months; the Petitioners were left at liberty to avail appropriate legal remedies if their grievances were not addressed; pending applications stood disposed.

¶1

$~ 8

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 5886/2018

¶4

RITU SOOD AND ORS. .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Appearance not given.

¶6

versus

¶7

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rakesh Kumar, SPC with Mr. Sunil, Advocate for UOI.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

¶10

O R D E R % 04.02.2026

¶11

The instant petition was being heard along with a connected matter, W.P.(C) 9548/2017, titled Dr. Ashutosh Dev Kaushik v. Union of India and Anr. The said petition has since been disposed of by this Court by an order dated 23^rd September, 2024.

¶12

The Petitioners submit that they are similarly situated to the petitioner in W.P.(C) 9548/2017 and seek the benefit of the directions issued by this Court in the aforesaid order.

¶13

It is a common ground of parties that the only distinction between the present Petitioners and Dr. Ashutosh Dev Kaushik is that Dr. Ashutosh Dev Kaushik had not given his consent for absorption in NIDM pursuant to the notice dated 11^th September, 2017, whereas the present Petitioners had given such consent. In the aforesaid order dated 23^rd September, 2024, this Court examined the relevant aspects of the matter and disposed of the writ petition

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

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 05/02/2026 at 12:45:43

¶16

without entering into the merits, while directing NIDM to consider whether the petitioner therein was entitled to count past service from the date of initial appointment for the purposes of regularisation and consequential benefits, including promotion and pension.

¶17

Since the Petitioners herein are similarly placed, the issue regarding the effect of their having given consent can also be considered by the competent authority while taking a decision, in terms of the directions issued by this Court on 23^rd September, 2024.

¶18

Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of in terms of the order dated 23^rd September, 2024 passed in W.P.(C) 9548/2017. The Respondents shall pass a reasoned decision in accordance with the said order within a period of three months from today.

¶19

Needless to say, the Petitioners shall be at liberty to avail appropriate legal remedies, if so advised, in the event the decision of the competent authority does not address their grievances.

¶20

The petition is disposed of along with all pending applications.

¶21

SANJEEV NARULA, J

¶22

FEBRUARY 4, 2026 as

¶23

This is a digitally signed order.

¶24

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 05/02/2026 at 12:45:43

Ritu Sood and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritu Sood and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Piraivanmathi P Vs Directorate of Education and Ors.

M/S Iifl Home Finance Ltd. Vs Sagar Aggarwal & Ors.

Dr Gitanjali Dey Vs Punjab National Bank through Branch Manager Vikas Puri

Amit Jain Vs General Manager Canara Bank & Ors.

Dr Bipin Batra Vs National Board of Examinations and Another

Resident Welfare Association Pocket- K and Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors.

Santhi Caterers Vs Union of India and Ors.

Kartik Rana Vs Airport Authority of India

Piraivanmathi P Vs Directorate of Education and Ors.

Amit Jain Vs General Manager Canara Bank & Ors.

Ashutosh Kumar Vs Nationals Scheduled Castes Finance and Development Corporation

Sunita Rani Vs Govt. of NCT Delhi and Ors.

Moti Lal Meena Vs Airports Authority of India

Raj Rani Verma Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi MCD through Its Commissioner & Anr.