Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005056

W.P.(C) 6792/2016 1

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Judgment reserved on : 06.10.2022

Judgment delivered on : 23.11.2022

+

W.P.(C) 6792/2016

NARESH KUMAR

..... Petitioners

versus

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

..... Respondents

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Nilansh Gaur and Mr. Shanker Raju,

Advocates.

Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Respondents :

Ms. Vibha Mahajan Seth and Ms. Divyanshi

Anand, Advocates for R-1.

Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel

with Ms. Palak Rohmetra, Ms. Laavanya

Kaushik, Ms. Aliza Alam and Mr. Siddharth

Tyagi, Advocate for DTC.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA

JUDGMENT

1.

The petitioner challenges the order dated 29.01.2016 in O.A.

No. 2548/2013 titled “Naresh Kumar vs. Government of NCT of

Delhi and Ors.” passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal,

TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J.

Digitally Signed

By:VINOD KUMAR

Signing Date:23.11.2022

16:17:01

Signature Not Verified

Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005056

W.P.(C) 6792/2016 2

Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’)

whereby the said OA was dismissed.

2.

The brief facts of the case of the petitioner are that consequent

upon his selection by the DSSSB, he was appointed by the

respondent-Delhi Transport Corporation, as a Driver on probation for

a period of two years with effect from 09.07.2009. There was no

criminal case registered/pending against him at the time of

appointment.

3.

As per the petitioner, a false criminal case, vide FIR

No.140/2009 dated 06.08.2009 under Section 307 IPC, P.S.

Kanjhawala, Delhi was registered against him. The Additional

Sessions Judge, Outer (II) Rohini Court, Delhi, granted him

anticipatory bail. The intimation regarding the said FIR and

anticipatory bail was given by him to the respondent-Delhi Transport

Corporation.

4.

The police, after completion of investigation, submitted the

final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., 1973 stating that no evidence

was found against the petitioner. Though he was discharging his

duties satisfactorily, the respondent-Delhi Transport Corporation

extended his probation period by one more year, i.e., up to

08.07.2012. The respondent-Delhi Transport Corporation again

extended his probation period on second occasion for six months up to

08.01.2013, and on third occasion for six months up to 08.07.2013.

5.

Thereafter, the respondent-Delhi Transport Corporation, vide

impugned order dated 05.07.2013, terminated his services under

Digitally Signed

By:VINOD KUMAR

Signing Date:23.11.2022

16:17:01

Signature Not Verified

Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005056

W.P.(C) 6792/2016 3

Clause 9 (a) (i) of the Delhi Road Transport Authority (Conditions of

Appointment & Service) Regulations, 1952 (hereinafter, in short

referred to as ‘the Regulations’) with immediate effect. It is contended

by the petitioner that the respondent-Delhi Transport Corporation

terminated his services without issuing any notice to him.

6.

According to the petitioner, there was no criminal case pending

against him. Though during the period of probation, he was

discharging his duties satisfactorily, the respondent-Delhi Transport

Corporation, instead of confirming him in the service, illegally and

arbitrarily terminated his services.

7.

The respondent-Delhi Transport Corporation had filed a counter

reply opposing the O.A. It is stated by the respondent-Delhi Transport

Corporation that in the attestation form, the petitioner specifically

mentioned that no criminal case was pending against him, and that he

was not involved in any criminal case. During verifi