Delhi High Court · 2026-01-13
ASI ANWAR HUSSAIN vs CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE AND ORS.
- Citation / case number
- W.P.(C)-2857/2020 2026:DHC:313-DB
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Petitioner
- ASI ANWAR HUSSAIN
- Respondent
- CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE AND ORS.
Judgment text excerpt
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 13.01.2026 + W.P.(C) 2857/2020, CM APPL. 9941/2020 ASI ANWAR HUSSAIN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ajay Sharma, Adv. versus CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, SPC, Ms. Pragya Yadav, Advs. Mr. Sanjay Kumar, (Insp. CISF, FHQ), Mr. V S Rawat (Asst. Commandant, CISF) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA V. KAMESWAR RAO, J. (ORAL) 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:- “a. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of in the nature of certiorari thereby quashing the order dated 20.09.2019 passed by the Respondent no. 1 and further more Issue a writ of mandamus upon the Respondents for granting appropriate relief in the nature of promotion to protect the Interest of justice.” 2. In substance, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 20.09.2019 whereby the Director General (“DG”), Central Industrial Security Force (“CISF”) in exercise of his powers has decided the mercy petition of the petitioner against the order passed by the Inspector General, Northern Sector modifying the penalty imposed on the petitioner, that of reduction of pay by one stage from Rs. 34,900/- to Rs. 33,900/- as per matrix level 5 in the scale of PB-I, 5200-20200 + Grade Pay 2800/- for a period of one year with Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRADEEP W.P.(C) 2857/2020 Page 1 of 9 SHARMA Signing Date:16.01.2026 15:34:58 immediate effect. It was further directed that he would earn increments of pay during the period of reduction and that on expiry of this period, the reduction would not have the effect of postponing his future increments of pay. 3. It may be stated here that the petitioner