Dharmendra Singh v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi High Court · 18 Nov 2025 · 2025:DHC:10184-DB
C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla
W.P.(C) 12321/2023
2025:DHC:10184-DB
administrative petition_dismissed Significant

AI Summary

A writ petition for re-fixation of seniority is not maintainable without impleading all necessary parties, and failure to do so results in dismissal with liberty to re-file.

Full Text
Translation output
W.P.(C) 12321/2023
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 12321/2023
DHARMENDRA SINGH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Abhay Kumar Bhargava, Mr. Satyaarth Sinha, Ms. Shradha Mewati, Advs.
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Krishna Kumar Sharma, SPC, Mr. Anil Devlal, GP.
Insp Athurv CRPF, Mr Inderpal and Mr Ramniwas Yadav CRPF
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA
ORDER(ORAL)
18.11.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
JUDGMENT

1. The petitioner seeks re-fixation of seniority without impleading necessary parties.

2. We are finding, everyday, petition after petition seeking antedated seniority without impleading necessary parties.

3. It is a well-settled principle, laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan v Ucchab Lal Chhanwal[1], Vijay Kumar Kaul v Union of India[2], Indu Shekhar Singh v State of U.P.3, J.S. Yadav v

W.P.(C) 12321/2023 State of U.P[4] and Padam Singh Jhina v Union of India[5], that, in cases of seniority, unless necessary parties are impleaded, the petition is not maintainable.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to re-institute the petition after impleading necessary parties.

C. HARI SHANKAR, J

OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J NOVEMBER 18, 2025