← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/13699/2025

Ashok Kumar v. Union Of India & ANR.

2025-09-08Hon'Ble Mr. Justice C.Hari Shankar,Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Om Prakash Shukla3 pages

$~57 & 58 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 13698/2025, CM APPL. 56245/2025 MEETA SINGH .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Vinod Sharma and Mr.

Yaduvinder Pal, Advs.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Jagdish Chandra, CGSC and Mr. Sujeet Kumar, Adv.

+ W.P.(C) 13699/2025, CM APPL. 56247/2025 ASHOK KUMAR .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Vinod Sharma and Mr.

Yaduvinder Pal, Advs.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Jagdish Chandra, CGSC Mr. Subodh Kumar Kaushik SPC and Ms.

Chhaya Sharma and Mr. Sujeet Kumar, Advs

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA ORDER(ORAL) % 08.09.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J CM APPL. 56246/2025 in WP(C) 13698/2025 ( for exemption) CM APPL. 56248/2025 in WP(C) 13699/2025 (for exemption) 1.

Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. 2.

The applications stand disposed of.

W.P.(C) 13698/2025 and W.P.(C) 13699/2025 3.

These writ petitions pray that a resignation tendered by the petitioners on 30 September 2004 in WP (C) 13698/2025 and on 14 March 2000 in WP (C) 13699/2025 be treated as not having been voluntarily tendered and the petitioners be permitted to rejoin service with attended benefits.

4.

There is no explanation whatsoever for the inordinate delay of over two decades in approaching this Court.

5.

In fact, further, the petitioner in WP (C) 13698/2025 has earlier approached this Court by way of WP (C) 11501/2016 seeking pensionary benefits.

6.

Even at that stage, no grievance was raised with respect to the resignation tendered by the petitioner in 2004. 7.

In the case of the petitioner in WP(C) 13698/2025, therefore, the considerations of constructive res judicata and Order II Rule 2 of the CPC would also come into play.

8.

In such circumstances, we are not in a position to examine these writ petitions on merits.

9.

The writ petitions are accordingly dismissed on the ground of delay and laches without examining them on merits. C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J.

SEPTEMBER 8, 2025/AT