ASHOK KUMAR vs UNION OF INDIA

Judgment text excerpt

$~102 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 8626/2021 ASHOK KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nitin Singh and Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vikrant N. Goyal, Sr. PC with Ms. Nishu, Mr. Aditya Shukla and Ms. Shivani Yadav, Advs. for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 16.01.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J. 1. The petitioner instituted OA 1325/2021 before the Central Administrative Tribunal1, contending that, he had worked with the respondent since 2001, even though he was substantively appointed only in 2009 and regularized in 2011. His claim before the Tribunal was for continuity of service from the year 2001. 2. The Tribunal has, even while recognizing the fact that, in certain circumstances, a claim for continuity of service could lie, 1 “the Tribunal” hereinafter W.P.(C) 8626/2021 Page 1 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR Signing Date:18.01.2025 20:37:38 noted that the petitioner did not have, with him, any appointment order or any other documents showing that he was a regular employee of the respondent from 2001. The petitioner candidly acknowledged, before the Tribunal, that he had no appointment order. The petitioner was only relying on certain identity cards which have been issued to him by the respondent. The photocopies of the said identity cards have also been placed on record. The Tribunal has held, in the impugned order, that issuance a mere identity card and entry passes do not confer right to an employee to claim continuity of service. 3. Following this reasoning, the Tribunal has dismissed the petitioner’s OA against which the petitioner has approached this Court. 4. We have heard Mr. Nitin Singh, learned Counsel f