Poonam Sharma And ORS v. M/S A 1security Service And ORS

$~62 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 2936/2025 POONAM SHARMA AND ORS .....Petitioners Through:

Ms. Aayushi Jain, Adv.

versus M/S A 1SECURITY SERVICE AND ORS .....Respondents Through:

Mr.V. Sibi Kargil, Mr.Ashish Kumar Upadhyay and Mr. V. Keerthana, Advs. for R-1.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

O R D E R

% 09.02.2026 1.

The Court vide order dated 07.03.2025 has made the following observations:

"CM APPL. 13950/2025 -Exemption

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. Application stands disposed of.

W.P.(CI 2936/20253.

3. The present petition raises a grievance as regards alleged malpractices against the contractual employees engaged in the Rohini Courts, NorthWest District, Delhi.

4. It is pointed out that the respondent no.l is the private contractor which is appointed pursuant to a tender, to provide security services at Rohini District Court. It is submitted that the said entity is engaged in the following illegal activities:

a) Forcing employees to sign blank documents later misused to fabricate resignation letters and false loan agreements. b) Forcibly opening bank accounts in employees' names and misappropriating their salaries.

c) Failing to deposit Provident Fund contributions deducted from employees' wages.

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 11/02/2026 at 11:28:18

d) Illegally terminating employees without notice or justification. e) Intimidating employees who sought legal remedies against their wrongful terminations.

5. It is submitted that the petitioners/contractual workers who have been engaged through respondent no.l have been subject to irregular payment of salaries, arbitrary terminations, and denial of basic employment benefits, violating their fundamental and statutory rights.

6. Issue notice to the respondent nos.l and 3, on necessary steps being taken by the petitioner, through all permissible modes including electronically.

7. Let reply be filed by the said respondents within a period of four weeks from today. Rejoinder thereto, be filed within a period of two weeks from today.

8. In the meantime, learned District Judge, Rohini Court, North-West District is requested to decide the complaint of the petitioner submitted on 13.01.2025 (Annexure P5) read with reminder dated 03.02.2025 (Annexure PS).

9. List on 26.05.2025."

2.

There does not seem to be any order passed by the concerned District Judge, Rohini Court, North West.

2.

The petitioner's complaint (Annexure P-5) vide its reminder dated 03.02.2025 (Annexure P-8) remains pending.

3.

Under these circumstances, there is no reason as to why this petition should be pending, and instead, it is directed that the petitioner's complaint dated 13.01.2025 be taken to its logical conclusion by the concerned District Judge with due expedition.

4.

Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J FEBRUARY 9, 2026/P 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 11/02/2026 at 11:28:18