$~63
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
% Date of decision: 27 August, 2024
+ W.P.(C) 13635/2023
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Vijay Joshi, Senior Panel Counsel
Versus
SHRI SUKHVINDER .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Ranbir Singh Kundu, Mr.
Mukesh Kumar, Mr. Anurag Pandey
and Mr. Srajan Shankar Kulshrestha,
Advocates
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (oral)
CM APPL.48863/2024 (for exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
CM APPL.48862/2024 (for early hearing by respondent)
2. Notice issued.
3. Mr. Vijay Joshi, learned senior panel counsel, accepts notice of the
application on behalf of the petitioners.
4. In view of reasons stated in the application, it is allowed and the main
petition is taken up for hearing today itself.
5. The application is disposed of.
W.P.(C) 13635/2023
6. In view of orders passed in CM APPL.48862/2024, the date of
11.11.2024 fixed in the present petition is cancelled and with the consent of
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
W.P.(C) 13635/2023 Page 1 of 3
By:ROHIT KUMAR
Signing Date:31.08.2024
12:49
learned counsel representing both the sides, the present petition is taken up
for hearing today itself.
7. The respondent had appeared in the examination conducted by M/s
CMC Ltd. for filling up the vacancies for the year 2013-14 for the post of
Postal Assistant/ Sorting Assistant under the Department of Post and
Telegraph. In the result declared on 17.03.2015, he was declared successful
and selected. The respondent claims to have completed pre formalities and
15 days house training between 09.03.2015 and 21.03.2015 and he was
.
appointed as SA SRO (Sub Record Office), RMS ‘AM’ Division, Mehsana
8. The petitioners vide Notice dated 23.12.2015 informed the respondent
regarding his termination from service, identifying him a culprit in
Directorate Vigilance Report with remarks .
“Forehead as For Head”
9. Being aggrieved respondent filed OA No.2001/2022 before learned
Central Administrative Tribunal (the Tribunal), Principal Bench, New Delhi
seeking his reinstatement, which was allowed by the learned Tribunal vide
impugned order dated 13.04.2023, thereby, setting aside his termination and
immediate reinstatement with consequential benefits as per law.
10. Vide present petition, the petitioners are seeking quashing and setting
aside of the impugned order dated 13.04.2023 passed by learned Central
Tribunal in OA No.2001/2022.
11. At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent has
pointed out that in a similar petition being W.P.(C) 15248/2022 titled as
Union of India & Ors. Vs. Sanjeev Kumar & Anr. vide order dated
18.07.2024 this Court has upheld the order passed by the learned Tribunal.
12. Learned senior panel counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners has
disputed the aforesaid submissions by stating that in the present case, though
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
W.P.(C) 13635/2023 Page 2 of 3
By:ROHIT KUMAR
Signing Date:31.08.2024
12:49
on the OMR sheet roll number is written, however, the same is not bubbled,
due to which services of respondent have been terminated.
13.
In the present case also, as per FSL report petitioner’s signature on the
OMR sheet did not match with the specimen signature.
14. Relevantly, in W.P.(C) 15248/2022 this Court upheld the judgment
dated 10.03.2022 passed by the learned Tribunal in O.A. No.2756/2019,
whereby the respondents therein, who were successfully recruited to the post
of Postal Assistant (PA)/Sorting Assistant (SA) in the Department of Posts
and whose services were terminated on the charge that their signatures on
their respective OMR sheets did not tally with those on the registration
forms; were directed to be reinstated observing that without conducting any
departmental enquiry and based upon unproved FSL report, termination
order cannot be sustained.
15. It is not the case of petitioners that there is any dispute with regard to
identification of the respondent. This Court is of the opinion that the case of
respondent is on similar footing as decision of this Court in W.P.(C)
15248/2022.
16. The present petition and pending application, if any, are accordingly
dismissed, with direction to the petitioners to reinstate respondent and grant
consequential benefits within four weeks.
(SURESH KUMAR KAIT)
JUDGE
(GIRISH KATHPALIA)
JUDGE
AUGUST 27, 2024/rk/r
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
W.P.(C) 13635/2023 Page 3 of 3
By:ROHIT KUMAR
Signing Date:31.08.2024
12:49