Dheeraj Kumar vs Commissioner of Police Delhi Police

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 1641

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Manish Garg, Member (J), Anand S Khati, Member (A)
Dheeraj Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Police Delhi Police – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Ajesh Luthra
For the Respondents: Ms. Ring Baliyan, Ms. Sunanda Shukla

Table of Content
1. applicant cleared in fir investigation; not chargesheeted or summoned. (Para 2)
2. respondents defend pending candidature per screening committee policy. (Para 3)
3. oa allowed; direct reconsideration for appointment. (Para 6)

ORDER

Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J) :

By way of the present Original Application, the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:-

“(a) quash and set aside impugned order dated 05.l2.2024 (Annexure A/l) alongwith impugned show cause notice dated 21.03.2024 (Annexure A/2) and;

(b) direct the respondents to forthwith further consider and appoint the applicant to the post of Constable (Exe.) (Male) and;

(d) Award costs of the proceedings; and (e) Pass any order/relief/direction(s) as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interests of justice in favour of the applicants.”

2. Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that pursuant to the advertisement issued in the year 2023 for recruitment to the post of Constable (Exe.) (Male) in Delhi Police, the applicant, belonging to the EWS category, duly participated in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 1641

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALManish Garg, Member (J), Anand S Khati, Member (A)Dheeraj Kumar – AppellantVersusCommissioner of Police Delhi Police – Respondent

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Manish Garg, Member (J), Anand S Khati, Member (A)
Dheeraj Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Police Delhi Police – Respondent