UNION OF INDIA & ORS. vs SHAHZAD SINGH

Judgment text excerpt

$~58 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 27.05.2025 + W.P.(C) 7382/2025 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. M.K. Bhardwaj and Mr. Praveen Kumar Kaushik, Advs. versus SHAHZAD SINGH .....Respondent Through: Mr. Himanshu Pathak, SPC with Mr. Amit Singh, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (Oral) CM APPL. 33094/2025 (Exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(C) 7382/2025 & CM APPL. 33095/2025 2. This petition has been filed challenging the Order dated 12.09.2024 passed by the learned Central Administration Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as, ‘Tribunal’) in O.A. No. 3984/2023, titled Shahzad Singh v. Union of India & Ors., allowing the said O.A. filed by the respondent, and setting aside the Orders dated 30.10.2023 and 04.07.2016 passed by the petitioners, and directing the petitioners to re-fix the pay of the respondent in terms of the earlier decision dated 14.10.2023 passed by the learned Tribunal in O.A. No. 656/2012 and O.A. No. 953/2012 titled P.R. Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRIYADARSHANI JAIN WP(C) 7382/2025 Page 1 of 3 Signing Date:31.05.2025 12:02:20 Anandvally Amma v. Union of India &Ors. 3. The grievance of the petitioners against the Impugned Order is that although the earlier representation of the respondent had been rejected by an Order dated 04.07.2016, the respondent did not challenge the said order and instead, re-represented against the same post the order of the learned Tribunal in P.R. Anandvally Amma(supra). The said claim was rejected by an Order dated 30.10.2023, stating that as the respondent was not a party to the aforementioned Original Applications, therefore, he could not claim the same relief