Major Deepak Vaishnav (Retired), v. Reserve Bank Of India And ANR.

$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5753/2024 & CM APPL. 18335/2025 MAJOR DEEPAK VAISHNAV (RETIRED), .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. M.K. Bhardwaj, Ms. Priyanka Bhardwaj, Mr.

Himanshu Bhardwaj and Mr.

Praveen Kaushik, Advocates.

versus RESERVE BANK OF INDIA AND ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Ramesh Babu, Ms. Manisha Singh, Ms. Nisha Sharma and Mr.

Rohan Srivastava, Advocates for RBI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

O R D E R

% 25.04.2025 CM APPL. 18335/2025 (for early hearing) 1.

This is an application filed by the petitioner for early hearing of the writ petition. There is no objection to this request. 2.

For the reasons stated in the application, it is allowed. 3.

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken on Board.

W.P.(C) 5753/2024 4.

The petitioner was working in respondent No. 1 - Reserve Bank of India ["RBI"] as an Assistant Manager (Security). He assails a W.P.(C) 5753/2024 Page 1 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

disciplinary order dated 21.11.2023. One of the contentions taken by Mr. Ramesh Babu, learned counsel for RBI, is that the disciplinary order is susceptible to appeal under Regulation 48 of the Reserve Bank of India (Staff) Regulations, 1948 ["the Regulations"]. 5.

Having regard to this objection, Mr. M.K. Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner, seeks permission to proceed in appeal before the Appellate Authority, and seeks a time-bound disposal of the petitioner's appeal.

6.

The appeal may be filed within two weeks from today, and be considered on merits rather than on the ground of limitation. The respondents will place the same before the Appellate Authority in accordance with law, to be disposed of within a period of three months thereafter.

7.

It is the contention of Mr. Bhardwaj that the Regional Director, who is the appropriate appellate authority under Rule 49 of the Regulations, has already been involved in the subject matter of the disciplinary proceedings. If so, the respondents may take an appropriate decision in accordance with the Regulations, as to the constitution of the Appellate Authority. As far as this aspect is concerned, this Court has not considered Mr. Bhardwaj's submission on merits. In the event any such contention arises, the petitioner will be free to take this ground, if he challenges any adverse orders. Mr. Bhardwaj also points out that an opinion was sought in this case from the RBI Services Board. At this stage, Mr. Babu assures the Court that the decision of the Appellate Authority will be taken independently, as required under the Regulations and the Master Circular on Staff Discipline of RBI dated 01.04.2022. W.P.(C) 5753/2024 Page 2 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

8.

The writ petition, alongwith the pending application, is disposed of with these directions.

PRATEEK JALAN, J APRIL 25, 2025 SS/AD/ W.P.(C) 5753/2024 Page 3 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.