High CourtsDivision Bench(2026) 07 DEL CK 1183

Union Of India & Anr. vs Mukesh Meena

Delhi High Court, Principal Bench, New Delhi · Decided on 7 July 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
C. Hari Shankar, J · Vinod Kumar, J
CASE NUMBER
W.P.(C) 8891/2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 265 words

C. Hari Shankar, J.

1.

This writ petition is directed against judgment dated 6 November 2025 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal1 in OA 850/2024, whereby the following directions have been issued in para 34:

“34.

In view of forgoing analysis, the present O.A. has merit and is deserved to be allowed. As a result thereof, the O.A. is allowed with following directions:

(i)

The Respondents are directed to consider to grant ad-hoc promotion to the applicant to the post of Joint Commissioner with effect from 06.07.2021 after opening the sealed cover of the DPC recommendation and further to accord all consequential benefits to the Applicant, as admissible in law, including salary and allowances of the promoted post of Joint Commissioner with effect from 06.07.2021;

(ii)

The above mentioned directions should be complied with within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order;

(iii)

All pending MAs, if any, are also disposed of.”

2.

At the outset, Mr. Tushar Ranjan Mohtany, learned Counsel for the respondent, submits that, in view of developments which have taken place after the passing of the judgment, he would be moving the Tribunal for a modification of the judgment and is not, therefore, presently insisting on compliance with the order of the Tribunal.

3.

In that view of the matter, reserving liberty with either party to approach this Court in case they are aggrieved by the decision taken on modification application, as and when moved, this writ petition does not survive for consideration and is accordingly disposed of.

Footnotes

  1. 1.“the Tribunal” hereinafter