D.C. MISHRA vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS

Judgment text excerpt

$~68 to 70 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6467/2017 D.C. MISHRA .....Petitioner Through: Petitioner in person versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Gagan Gupta, Mr. Shitanshu & Ms. Mishika Gupta, Advs. + W.P.(C) 6481/2017 D.C. MISHRA .....Petitioner Through: Petitioner in person versus INDIAN COUNCIL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Gagan Gupta, Mr. Shitanshu & Ms. Mishika Gupta, Advs. + W.P.(C) 6496/2017 D.C. MISHRA .....Petitioner Through: Petitioner in person versus INDIAN COUNCIL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Gagan Gupta, Mr. Shitanshu & Ms. Mishika Gupta, Advs. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AJIT W.P.(C) 6467/2017, W.P.(C) 6481/2017 & W.P.(C) 6496/2017 Page 1 of 5 KUMAR Signing Date:04.05.2026 15:40:21 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 29.04.2026 C. HARI SHANKAR, J. 1. The order of the Tribunal which is under challenge in these writ petitions at the instance of the applicant before the Tribunal in OA 4022/2012, OA 4023/2012 and OA 905/2014 reads as under: “The applicant, who has filed these Original Applications, appears in person seeks adjournment to argue the matter on some other date. 2. It is seen from record that these are very old matters and on one pretext or the other have been adjourned day after day. Therefore, no further adjournment is allowed. 3. I have gone through the files and the following clearly are made out:- (1) No one in his peer group wants to work with the applicant (Annexure R-4 makes it abundantly clear). (2) Even the non ministerial staff including Sr. non ministerial staff such as UDCs of the office found it difficult to work with the applicant. In fact, it appears