Khursheed Alam Farooqi v. Govt. Of NCT Delhi & ORS.
$~41, 43 & 45 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 04.08.2025 (41)+ W.P.(C) 11531/2025 & CM APPL. 47177/2025, CM APPL. 47178/2025 MOHD. ABBAS .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Vinay Khinger , Ms. Roopa Nagpal, Advs.
versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
....Respondents Through:
Ms. Yeeshu Jain (ASC), Mr.
Aveeraj Sharma, Ms.
Priya Shukla, Advs. for R1 & R2.
Mr. Tushar Sannu (SC) along with Ms.
Aqsa, Advs.
for DWB.
(43)+ W.P.(C) 11533/2025 & CM APPL. 47183/2025, CM APPL. 47184/2025 MURSALEEN ALI .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Vinay Khinger , Ms. Roopa Nagpal, Advs.
versus GOVT. OF NCT DELHI & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Ms. Yeeshu Jain (ASC), Mr.
Aveeraj Sharma, Ms.
Priya Shukla, Advs. for R1 & R2.
Mr. Tushar Sannu (SC) along with Ms.
Aqsa, Advs.
for DWB.
(45)+ W.P.(C) 11566/2025 & CM APPL. 47258/2025, CM APPL. 47259/2025
KHURSHEED ALAM FAROOQI .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Vinay Khinger , Ms. Roopa Nagpal, Advs.
versus GOVT. OF NCT DELHI & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Ms. Yeeshu Jain (ASC), Mr.
Aveeraj Sharma, Ms.
Priya Shukla, Advs. for R1 & R2.
Mr. Tushar Sannu (SC) along with Ms.
Aqsa, Advs.
for DWB.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL) 1.
These petitions have been filed seeking a direction to the learned Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') to hear and dispose of the respective O.A.(s) filed by the petitioner(s) herein.
2.
The learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that the petitioner(s) are out of employment and, therefore, there is urgency in the O.A.(s) being heard. He further submits that the pleadings in the O.A.(s) have been completed and, in fact, on an earlier occasion, the learned Tribunal itself had allowed an expedited hearing of the O.A.(s).
3.
We are afraid that, in the exercise of our power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, we would not like to determine the
functioning of the learned Tribunal or dictate the matters it must give priority to for the purposes of hearing.
4.
The appropriate remedy for the petitioner(s) is to approach the learned Tribunal itself with such a prayer, and it is for the learned Tribunal to consider the same, keeping in view the number and nature of matters pending before it. Merely because the petitioner(s) have the wherewithal to approach this Court does not mean that we must direct the learned Tribunal to accord them an expedited hearing over others who are unable to do so.
5.
We, therefore, dismiss these petitions, however, reserve liberty to the petitioner(s) to approach the learned Tribunal with an appropriate application, if so advised, for seeking expedited hearing of their OAs. If such applications are filed, the learned Tribunal shall consider the same without being influenced by any observation made by us in the present petitions. The pending applications also stand disposed of as infructuous.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J MADHU JAIN, J AUGUST 4, 2025/ys/VG/DG