Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 09.07.2025 (1)+ W.P.(C) 15393/2004 & CM APPL. 11189/2004, CM APPL.
11190/2004 RAVI PATWARDHAN .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Saket Sikri, Mr. Ajay Pal Singh and Mr. Jasbir Bidhuri, Advs.
Through: Mr. Manoj Ranjan Sinha and Mr. Vishal Agrawal, Advs. for
R-4 and 5.
(2)+ W.P.(C) 19873/2004 & CM APPL. 14721/2004, CM APPL., 14722/2004 , CM APPL. 14723/2004 , CM APPL. 66229/2023
LAKSHMI NARAYAN NAYAK .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ashim Shridhar, Ms Patwardhan, Ms Ishika Jain and
Ms. Niyati Patwardhan, Advs.
Through: Mr. Manoj Ranjan Sinha and Mr. Vishal Agrawal, Advs. for
R-4 and 5.
Mr. JPN Shahi and Mr. Divyanshu Kumar, Advs. for R-
6 and 7.
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL)
JUDGMENT
1. W.P.(C) 15393/2004 has been filed challenging the Order dated 16.07.2004 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Tribunal’) in Transfer Application No. 35/2002 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the TA’) as also the Order dated 25.08.2004 in Review Application being R.A. No. 222/2004 filed in the above T.A.
2. W.P.(C) 19873/2004 has been filed challenging the Order dated 16.07.2004 passed by the learned Tribunal in T. A. No. 35/2002 as also the Order dated 16.11.2004 passed in RA No. 223/2004 filed in the above T.A.
3. By the common Impugned Order dated 16.07.2004, the appointment of the petitioners was quashed on the ground that they did not possess the prescribed essential qualifications for appointment to the post of Junior Statistical Officer.
4. Vide the Impugned Orders dated 25.08.2004 and 16.11.2004, the Review Applications filed by the petitioners were dismissed.
5. Aggrieved by the above orders, the petitioners challenge the same by way of these writ petitions.
6. This Court, vide its Order dated 22.09.2004 passed in W.P.(C) 15393/2004, and Order dated 04.01.2005 passed in W.P.(C) 19873/2004, stayed the operation of the Impugned Orders passed by the learned Tribunal. These interim Orders were made absolute by this Court vide its subsequent Orders.
7. The learned counsels for the petitioners submits that during the pendency of the present petitions not only the petitioners but also the contesting respondents have superannuated from the same post. They further submit that, therefore, the question raised in the present petitions have been rendered academic in nature, the petitioners have already performed their duties at the said posts pursuant to the interim Orders.
8. Keeping in view the above submissions, we dispose of the present petitions by holding that as the petitioners have already performed their duties at the given posts for their entire tenure, the questions raised in the present petition have been rendered academic in nature.
9. The Impugned Orders of the learned Tribunal shall, therefore, not come in the way of the petitioners in securing their retiral benefits.
10. The petitions, along with pending applications, are disposed of in the above terms.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J RENU BHATNAGAR, J JULY 9, 2025 p/my/VS