Rekha Rani v. Pawan Hans Limited And ANR

$~88 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6672/2025 & CM APPL. 30231-30232/2025 REKHA RANI .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Mukesh Kumar and Mr.

Sushant Sagar, Advocates.

versus PAWAN HANS LIMITED AND ANR .....Respondents Through:

Mr. Puneet Taneja, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Manmohan Singh Narula and Mr. Amit Yadav, Advocates for R-1.

Ms. Avshreya Pratap Singh Rudy, SPC with Mr. Adil Hussain Taqvi, GP, Ms. Usha Jamnal and Ms.

Harshita Chaturvedi, Advocates for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

O R D E R

% 19.05.2025 1.

The petitioner seeks regularisation in the services of respondent No.1 - Pawan Hans Limited.

2.

Alongwith the writ petition, the petitioner has annexed minutes of a meeting dated 18.06.2019, of the National Commission of Scheduled Castes ["Commission"] held on 27.05.2019, by which the Commission recommended that the petitioner be appointed on a regular basis. The fact that the said order has been challenged by respondent No.1 before this Court [W.P.(C) 7355/2019] has been mentioned in the list of dates and, W.P.(C) 6672/2025 Page 1 of 2 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 01/07/2025 at 22:34:48

somewhat obliquely, in paragraph 4 of the writ petition. However, Mr. Puneet Taneja, learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.1, who appears on advance notice, states that this Court has passed an interim order dated 10.07.2019 in the said writ petition, by which the recommendation of the Commission has been stayed.

3.

I find it difficult to appreciate that the petitioner has annexed an order of a Constitutional Authority, mentioned that the order has been challenged by the employer in a writ petition to which she herself is a party, but failed to disclose that an interim order has been passed in the said writ petition.

4.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition, with liberty to file a fresh writ petition after rectifying the deficiencies in the present writ petition. He expresses an apology for the aforesaid state of affairs, which he states is on account of an error of judgment at the end of the drafting counsel. 5.

Having regard to this submission, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to file a fresh writ petition on the same cause of action. It is made clear that if any suppression is found in the subsequent writ petition, all consequences of such suppression will follow. 6.

All pending applications also stand dismissed as withdrawn. PRATEEK JALAN, J MAY 19, 2025 SS/kb/ W.P.(C) 6672/2025 Page 2 of 2 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 01/07/2025 at 22:34:48