Sudhanshu Yadav v. Delhi Development Authority & ANR.

$~74 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 1193/2026 & CM APPL. 5858/2026 (for stay) SUDHANSHU YADAV .....Petitioner Through:

Dr. Divya Swamy, Advocate.

versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR. .....Respondents Through:

Ms. Latika Malhotra, Advocate for DDA.

Dr. Divya Swamy, SC for MCD with Mr. Yagyawalkya Singh, Ms. Pragya Patel, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R

% 28.01.2026 1.

The Petitioner's result for the post of Assistant Section Officer in Delhi Development Authority has been withheld, constraining him to approach this Court.

2.

At the outset, counsel for the Respondents raise an objection as to the maintainability of the present petition, contending that the DDA is a notified authority under Section 14 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 and the dispute raised herein falls within the jurisdiction of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT). It is submitted that, in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in L. Chandra Kumar vs Union of India & Ors.,1 the Petitioner, having an efficacious alternative remedy before the CAT, cannot 1 AIR 1997 SC 1125 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/01/2026 at 14:45:38

invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court.

3.

She further states, on instructions, that the Petitioner's case has been rejected on the ground that the Petitioner was prosecuted under Section 223(a) of the BNS, which proceedings culminated in the imposition of penalty. A copy of the final minutes of the meeting recording the said decision has been supplied to the counsel for the Petitioner. 4.

In view of the objections raised by the Respondents regarding the maintainability of the present petition, and since the reasons for rejection have now been furnished, Dr. Divya Swamy, counsel for the Petitioner, on instructions, seeks leave to withdraw the present petition with liberty to approach the Tribunal in accordance with law. 5.

Leave and liberty as prayed for are granted.

6.

It is clarified that this Court has not examined the merits of the case. Accordingly, the withdrawal of the present petition shall not be construed as any expression of opinion on the merits, and all rights and contentions of the parties are left open.

SANJEEV NARULA, J JANUARY 28, 2026/ab The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/01/2026 at 14:45:38