MAN SINGH vs UOI & ORS

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 21.01.2026 Judgment pronounced on: 06.02.2026 Judgment uploaded on: 06.02.2026 + W.P.(C) 1170/2008 MAN SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ashok Agarwal, Mr. Kumar Utkarsh and Manoj Kumar, Adv. versus UOI & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. T. P. Singh, SCGC for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL JUDGMENT ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. 1. By invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner calls in question the correctness of the orders dated 19.04.2006 and 21.07.2006 [hereinafter referred to as „Impugned Orders‟], passed in O.A No.1033/2005 and R.A. No.99/2006 in O.A. No.1033/2005, respectively, by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as „the Tribunal‟]. 2. Vide the Impugned Order dated 19.04.2006, the Tribunal declined to quash the Punishment Order dated 30.06.2004 [hereinafter referred to as „Punishment Order‟] and the Appellate Authority Order dated 22.11.2004 [hereinafter referred to as „AA Order‟]. By the Signature Not Verified Signed By:JAI NARAYAN Signing Date:06.02.2026 W.P.(C) 1170/2008 Page 1 of 7 14:58:20 Punishment Order, the Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Mathura Division, Mathura [hereinafter referred to as „SSPO‟], imposed upon the Petitioner the penalty of “Dismissal from service”, which came to be upheld by the AA Order. 3. The issue that arises for consideration before this Court is whether the Tribunal was justified in law in declining to quash the Punishment Order and the AA Order, imposing and upholding the penalty of dismissal from service, as affirmed vide the Impugned Orders. FACTUAL MATRIX: 4. In order to appreciate the issue arising in the p