Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 7869/2026, CM APPL. 38055/2026, CM APPL.
38056/2026 & CM APPL. 38057/2026 UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Satish Aggarwala, SSC, Mr. Shiv Kumar, GP, and Mr. Gagan Vaswani, Adv.
Through: Ms. Sakshi Saugat for Mr. M.K.
Bhardwaj, Adv. Mr. Siddhartha Nagpal, SPC for R2.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA
JUDGMENT
29.05.2026 C. HARI SHANKAR J.
1. This writ petition assails judgment dated 3 November 2025 in OA 2621/2025, which was filed by the respondent challenging his termination under Rule 5(1) of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965.
2. The Central Administrative Tribunal[1] has held, in the impugned judgment, that, inasmuch as the termination of the services of the respondent was on the ground that he was impersonated, the “The Tribunal” hereinafter termination was stigmatic and could not have been effected without holding an enquiry.
3. Accordingly, the Tribunal has set aside the impugned order and issued the following directions:
4. Mr. Aggarwala submits that the respondent has since been reinstated in service and that they would also be proceeding to hold an enquiry against the respondent, if so advised, as permitted by para 9 (iv).
5. His grievance is restricted to para 9(iii) by which the respondent has been entitled to all consequential benefits in accordance with relevant rules and instructions on the subject.
6. We do not see how we can interfere with such a direction, which only requires the respondent to be given benefits as available in law.
7. Mr. Aggarwala submits that he has an apprehension that the respondent may file a contempt proceeding before the Tribunal. In case any such proceedings are filed, it would be for the petitioner to satisfy the Tribunal that there was no wilful or contumacious disobedience of the orders passed by the Tribunal.
8. Accordingly, we find no reason to interfere in the present matter.
9. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
C. HARI SHANKAR, J
OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J MAY 29, 2026