CourtKutchehry.com
Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench

Vikas Kumar, Group ‘C’ & Others vs National Capital Territory Of Delhi & Others

Central Administrative Tribunal · Decided on 15 February 2021 · Citation: (2021) 02 CAT CK 0091

HON’BLE JUDGES
L. Narasimha Reddy, J · Aradhana Johri, Member (A)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Original Application 1282, 1361, 1387, 1503, 1789, 1791, 2044, 2045 Of 2020, 2245, 3507, 2692 Of 2019, 3558, 3936 Of 2018, 1756 Of 2016, Miscellaneous Application 1599, 1704, 1733, 1894, 2315, 2314, 2625, 2626 Of 2020 And Batch, 3829 Of 2019, 2551, 3572 O
Download PDFAsk AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 228 words

L. Narasimha Reddy, J

1.

In this batch of OAs, the applicants seek the relief in the form of direction to the respondents to regularize their services.

2.

Reliance is placed upon a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi (2006) 4 SCC 1, and judgment of Honb'le High Court of Delhi in W.P (c) No. 6798/2002 titled Sonia Gandhi & Ors. Vs. GNCTD & ors.

3.

The OAs are pending for quite some time. Obviously because the issue is general and at the same time complicated, however, they are being adjourned from time to time.

4.

It is represented that the same issue is being dealt with by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in a Contempt Case No. 980/2016. When the very implementation of the judgment of Hon'ble High Court is under consideration in the contempt proceedings, the Tribunal cannot take any independent view as regards the application of law laid down in the concerned Writ Petitions.

5.

We, therefore, close all these OAs together with the M.As, leaving it open to the applicants to await outcome of the adjudication taking place before the Hon'ble High Court in contempt case.

6.

We make it clear that if any grievance subsists, it is left open to them to approach the Tribunal by filing fresh application. There shall be no order as costs.