Disposed¶23

Navneet Parashar v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Ors.

Delhi HC18 May 2026W.P.(C)/6892/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court; W.P.(C) 6892/2026 & conn. W.P.(C) 6896/2026; Navneet Parashar; Shane Mabood; Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL); Tribunal order dated 18 April 2026 in OA 3092/2025; para 22 direction; compliance time frame of four weeks; decision on representation; order of transfer; one week compliance; disposed 18 May 2026; C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondents to take a decision on the representation along with OA 3092/2025 within four weeks and communicate it to the petitioner forthwith, keeping in mind the Tribunal's observations in the impugned order; petitioner given one week to comply with the order of transfer. ¶23

Navneet Parashar Vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Ors. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether this Court should fix a time frame within which the respondents must comply with the direction contained in para 22 of the Tribunal's order dated 18 April 2026 in OA 3092/2025 (impugned in the writ petitions).

¶19

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to take a decision on the representation along with the OA within a period of four weeks.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

The decision, once taken, shall be communicated to the petitioner forthwith.

¶23

Key takeaways

The decision is to be taken keeping in mind the observations entered by the Tribunal in the impugned order.ratio¶24
Either side continuing to remain aggrieved is at liberty to seek remedies available in law.obiter¶24
The petitioner is given one week's time to comply with the order of transfer.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Justices C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla), order dated 18 May 2026: two connected writ petitions (W.P.(C) 6892/2026, CM APPL. 33815-17/2026, and W.P.(C) 6896/2026, CM APPL. 33868-70/2026) by Navneet Parashar and Shane Mabood against Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Others, challenging the Tribunal's order dated 18 April 2026 in OA 3092/2025, were disposed of after counsel restricted the relief sought to fixation of a compliance time frame. The respondents were directed to take a decision on the representation along with the OA within four weeks and communicate it forthwith, keeping in mind the Tribunal's observations in the impugned order; both sides were left free to pursue further legal remedies, and the petitioner was given one week's time to comply with the order of transfer.

¶1

$~71 & 83

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 6892/2026, CM APPL. 33815-17/2026

¶4

NAVNEET PARASHAR .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Saaket Jain, Ms. Shivangi Anand and Mr. Ankur Singhal, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED & ORS.

¶8

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Ashok Kumar Poddar and Ms. Sneha Poddar, Advocates.

¶9

W.P.(C) 6896/2026, CM APPL. 33868-70/2026 SHANE MABOOD .....Petitioner

¶10

Through: Mr. Saaket Jain, Ms. Shivangi Anand and Mr. Ankur Singhal, Advocates.

¶11

versus

¶12

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED & ORS.

¶13

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Ashok Kumar Poddar and Ms. Sneha Poddar, Advocates.

¶14

CORAM:

¶15

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA

¶16

ORDER (ORAL)

¶17

% 18.05.2026

¶18

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

¶19

1. After some hearing, Mr. Jain, learned Counsel for the petitioner restricts his remedy to a fixing of time frame by this Court within

¶20

Signature Not Verified Signed By:ANUBHAVW.P.(C) 6892/2026 & conn. TRIPATHI Signing Da te:2 1.05.2026 15:38:48

¶21

Page 1 of 2

¶22

which the respondents would comply with the direction contained in para 22 of the order dated 18 April 2026 in OA 3092/2025, under challenge in the present writ petition.

¶23

2. Accordingly, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents to take a decision on the representation along with the OA within a period of four weeks from today. The decision as and when taken shall be communicated to the petitioner forthwith.

¶24

3. We clarify that the decision would be taken keeping in mind the observations entered by the Tribunal in the impugned order. Should either side would continue to remain aggrieved, would be at liberty to seek remedies available in law.

¶25

4. The petitioner is given one week's time to comply with the order of transfer.

¶26

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

¶27

OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J.

¶28

MAY 18, 2026/pa

¶29

Signature Not Verified

¶30

Signed By:ANUBHAVW.P.(C) 6892/2026 & conn. TRIPATHI Signing Da te:2 1.05.2026 15:38:48

¶31

Page 2 of 2

Navneet Parashar v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Navneet Parashar v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.C.Jain & Ors. Vs Vice Chancellor, Delhi Univers

M.R.Giri Vs Registrar National Museum Inst

Tapash Datta Vs Indian Oil Corporation

Dr Virender Baboria Vs Union of India and Anr.

Kamlesh Singh and Anr. Vs Government of NCT of Delhi Ors.

Gti Infotel Private Limited Vs 1. Union of India & Ors.

Neena Bhasin Vs Union of India & Ors.

Vasi Vs Muncipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Anil Goel Vs Orient Links Pvt. Ltd.

Delhi Development Authority Vs M/S Integrated Techno Systems Pvt. Ltd.

R.P. Saxena Vs Union of India and Ors.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Dharmendra Kumar Vidyarthi and Ors.

Delhi Jal Board Vs Ram Kishan

Shane Mabood Vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Ors.