Union Of India & ORS. v. Om Pal And ORS.

$~7 (Spl. Bench) * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 892/2021 UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

.....Petitioners Through:

Ms.Radhika Bishwajit Dubey, CGSC, Ms.Gurleen Kaur, Adv.

versus OM PAL AND ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr.A.K. Trivedi, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN

O R D E R

% 13.02.2026 CM APPL. 10158/2026 1.

This application has been filed seeking condonation of delay of 30 days in filing the Review Petition.

2.

For the reasons stated in the application, the delay is condoned. 3.

The application is disposed of.

REVIEW PET. 76/2026 4.

The present Review Petition has been filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 read with Sections 114 and 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, seeking review of our judgment and order dated 03.12.2025. 5.

We have, in our impugned judgment, dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the petitioners, inter alia, observing as under: "5. While we do find some merit in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, keeping in view the admitted position that the orders passed by the learned Tribunals, including those of the Chandigarh 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 17/02/2026 at 13:04:15

Bench and the Nagpur Bench, have been upheld by the respective High Courts and have been implemented in respect of other similarly situated persons, like the respondents herein, we are not inclined to interfere with the Impugned Order in the exercise of our powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. There cannot be discrimination between two sets of similarly situated employees merely because their litigations have taken different paths and trajectories."

6.

The learned counsel for the review petitioners submits that this Court has wrongly recorded that the order passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, has been upheld by the High Court of Bombay. She submits that the challenge thereagainst is still pending adjudication.

7.

In our view, this would not be sufficient to review our judgment, inasmuch as, it is not in dispute that the order passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, has not only been upheld by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana but has also been implemented.

8.

The Review Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. NAVIN CHAWLA, J MADHU JAIN, J FEBRUARY 13, 2026/Arya/Yg 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 17/02/2026 at 13:04:15