VIJENDER KUMAR vs DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~34 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 10179/2025, CM APPLs. 42272/2025, 42273/2025 & 42274/2025 VIJENDER KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nishaank Mattoo, Ms. Sanjivani Pattjoshi, Mr. Rishabh Munjal and Mr. Devrishi Tyagi, Advs. versus DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Adv. for DMRC Ms. Ekta Choudhary, Mr. Ayush Kumar and Ms. Kanika Kalra, Advs. for R-2 Mr. Gaurav Dhingra and Mr. Shashank Singh, Advs. for GNCTD/R-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 18.07.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J. 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assails judgment dated 1 July 2025, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal1 in OA 2347/20242. By the impugned judgment, the Tribunal has dismissed the OA. Aggrieved thereby, 1 “the Tribunal”, hereinafter 2 Vijender Kumar v DMRC and Ors. Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) 10179/2025 Digitally Signed By:AJIT Page 1 of 21 KUMAR Signing Date:28.07.2025 09:47:47 Vijender Kumar, the applicant in the OA, has petitioned this Court. 2. We have heard Mr. Nishaank Mattoo, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ankur Chhibber, learned Counsel for Respondent 1 at length. 3. Several prayers were made before the Tribunal, and stand reiterated before this Court. However, only two prayers have substantially been urged, both before the Tribunal as well as before us. The first is a challenge to Rule 42(6) of the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (Conduct, Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 20213. The second is for a stay of further disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner, following the issuance of Memorandum dated 4 September 20234, till the conclusion of the criminal case pending against him before the learned Add