W.P.(C.) No. 6102/2013

Page 1 of 18

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Judgment reserved on: 12.07.2022

%

Judgment delivered on: 15.07.2022

+

W.P.(C) 6102/2013

SATYA PRAKASH

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr. Shree Prakash Sinha, Mr. Rakesh

Mishra, Ms. Mahua Sinha and Mr.

Nawalendra Kumar, Advocates.

versus

UNION OF INDIA & ANR

..... Respondent

Through:

Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC with

Mr. Shubham Gupta, Advocates for

Respondent Nos. 1 & 2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

J U D G M E N T

SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, C.J.

1.

The present writ petition is arising out of the order dated 14.08.2013

passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, O.A. No.

1744/2007, dismissing the Original Application preferred by the writ

petitioner claiming appointment in Group „A‟/ Group „B‟ of the Central

Civil Services as well as rejecting the claim of the petitioner for grant of

seniority.

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/002596

W.P.(C.) No. 6102/2013

Page 2 of 18

2.

Facts of the case reveals that the petitioner before this Court

participated in the Civil Services Examination, 1996 – which was conducted

by Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), and was not able to achieve a

berth in all of the services notified by the UPSC.

3.

The petitioner came before the Central Administrative Tribunal by

filing an Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative

Tribunals Act, and the same was registered as OA No. 294/1998. The

Original Application preferred by the petitioner was dismissed by an order

dated 03.05.1999.

4.

The petitioner, thereafter, preferred a writ petition i.e. W.P.(C) No.

3561/1999, and the petition was allowed by the Division Bench of this court

by judgement dated 10.09.2022, and thereafter an appeal was preferred

before the Hon‟ble Supreme Court by the Union Of India that is Civil

Appeal No. 5505-5507/2003. The SLP was decided on 05.04 2006.

5.

The Supreme Court directed the Union Of India to make allocation of

service to the petitioner within a period of one month, and thereafter as the

order was not complied within one month a Contempt Petition was preferred

i.e. Contempt Petition (C) No.13/2007.

6.

During the pendency of the Contempt Petition, the Department of

Personnel and Training allocated Central Industrial Security Forces (CISF)

to the petitioner as well as to one more person namely Anil Kumar who was

a writ petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 3569/1999 (Who had appeared in Civil

Services Exam of 1994).

7.

In spite of the fact that the petitioner was allocated to CISF, he did not

join and sought extension from time to time, and also prayed before the

Hon‟ble Supreme Court seeking allocation to any other Group„A‟ Service

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/002596

W.P.(C.) No. 6102/2013

Page 3 of 18

failing which to DANIPS, Group „B‟. No relief was granted to the petitioner

by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in respect of appointment to Group „A‟

service or allocation to DANIPS, and the Contempt Petition was dismissed.

8.

The Supreme Court while dismissing the Contempt Petition vide

order dated 21.09.2007 granted liberty to file Original Application before

the Tribunal only in respect of appointment and seniority and other benefits

in CISF. The petitioner – on account of the liberty granted by the Hon‟ble

Supreme Court, has preferred O.A. No. 1774/2007 praying for the following

reliefs:

(b direct the Respondent No.1 to allocate ay other Group „A‟

(c) grant all other consequential benefits as permissible”

9.

The tribunal has dismissed the Original Application, and the order

dismissing Original Application, is the subject matter in the present writ

petition.

10.

This court has heard learned counsels for the parties at length, and

perused the records. The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the

petitioner had app