DEVANAND SHUKLA vs CENTRAL VIGILANCE COMMISSION

Judgment text excerpt

$~35 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 07.04.2026 + LPA 219/2026 DEVANAND SHUKLA .....Appellant Through: Appellant-in-person Versus CENTRAL VIGILANCE COMMISSION .....Respondent Through: Mr. Piyush Beriwal and Ms. Ruchita Srivastava, Advs. for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA TEJAS KARIA, J. (ORAL) 1. This intra-court Appeal has been filed questioning the order dated 16.06.2026 passed in W.P.(C) No.2130/2026 whereby the Appellant’s Writ Petition was dismissed in view of order dated 31.01.2026 passed in W.P.(C) 15753/2025 filed earlier by the Appellant while observing that if the Appellant has any grievance against the Central Vigilance Commission (“CVC”), he shall be at liberty to approach the said authority. 2. The Appellant had lodged various vigilance complaints on the online portal of the CVC regarding alleged misconduct and vigilance-related issues involving public authorities and regulated entities, including matters connected with the Department of Financial Services (“DFS”), the Insurance and Regulatory and Development Authority of India (“IRDAI”) and the Reserve Bank of India (“RBI”). These complaints were registered as CVC Complaint Nos.112564/2025, 112565/2025 and 112566/2025 (“Complaints”). LPA 219/2026 Page 1 of 9 Signature Not Verified Signed By:NEELAM SHARMA Signing Date:09.04.2026 13:13:41 3. According to the Appellant, instead of conducting any enquiry, the CVC merely forwarded the Complaints to departmental authorities and treated them as closed without recording any speaking order and without communicating any reasons to the Appellant. The Appellant has alleged that the closure of the Complaints was contrary to CVC Master Guidelines on Complaint Handling and Vigilance Examination, which man