* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Reserved on : 18.09.2025 Pronounced on: 20.11.2025

+ W.P.(C) 15193/2021 & CM APPL. 47854/2021

RITU RAVI PRAKASH .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Rajesh Katyal and Ms.Seema Katyal, Advs.

versus

UNION OF INDIA .....Respondent

Through: Mr. Ranvir Singh, SPC with Mr. Vikas Kumar Singh, Adv. (through VC)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN

J U D G M E N T

MADHU JAIN, J.

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the Order dated 29.06.2021 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’) in O.A. No. 1289/2020, titled Ritu Ravi Prakash v. Union of India., whereby the learned Tribunal dismissed the O.A. filed by the petitioner herein and upheld the penalty order passed by the Disciplinary Authority.

BRIEF FACTS:

2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition are that the petitioner, Smt. Ritu Ravi Prakash, is serving as an Assistant Section Officer in the Central Secretariat Service. The petitioner is the mother of two daughters, namely Ms. Vidishaa Prakash, born on 31.03.1995, and Ms. Ravisha Prakash, born on 06.02.1998. During the academic years 2012–2016, both her daughters were pursuing studies in Classes X and XII, and the petitioner had applied for Child Care Leave (CCL) on several occasions for their examinations and related needs. The leave, however, was not sanctioned on the occasions detailed hereinafter, and the subsequent period of her absence from duty became the subject of disciplinary proceedings.

3. The record shows that while posted in the Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs, the petitioner applied for CCL for 61 days from 28.01.2013 to 29.03.2013 on the ground of her elder daughter’s Class XII Board Examination. Though the application was recommended by the Section Officer, it was not sanctioned by the competent authority in view of the rotational transfer orders No.07/04/2012-CS.I (A) dated 27.12.2012, issued by the Department of Personnel and Training. Under the said orders, the petitioner was transferred from the Ministry of Home Affairs cadre to the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment cadre and was relieved from the Ministry of Indian Overseas Affairs with effect from 31.01.2013.

4. The petitioner joined duty in the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment on 01.02.2013 and applied for 68 days of CCL from 04.02.2013 to 12.04.2013. The application was returned without any endorsement. A separate request for earned leave for the same period was also not acted upon. The petitioner sent a copy of the said request by Speed Post on 13.02.2013.

5. The petitioner joined duty on 13.12.2013 and was thereafter transferred to the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) under order No. A-22020/01/2008-Estt.l dated 31.12.2013. She applied for 54 days’ CCL from 03.03.2014 to 25.04.2014 in connection with her younger daughter’s Class X Board Examinations. The NCBC informed her verbally that the request could not be processed in the absence of her Service Book. On 24.02.2014, the petitioner obtained an attested copy of her leave account from the parent Ministry and supplied the same to NCBC. Subsequently, the Service Book was transmitted to NCBC on 04.03.2014.

6. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted another application dated 08.03.2014 requesting for CCL with effect from 11.03.2014 to 02.05.2014 for 53 days as the Service Book had been provided and no intimation with respect to her last request had been given. Vide letter dated 13.03.2014, she was informed that her CCL could not be granted due to exigencies of work. Despite citing that a similarly situated employee of the NCBC had been granted CLL, her requests were not acceded to.

7. Thereafter, from 05.05.2014 till the order dated 08.08.2014 relieving her from the services of the NCBC, the pet