Government Of National Capital Territory Of Delhi v. Dr. Promila Malhotra & ORS

$~9.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7689/2017 & C.M. Nos.31819/2017 GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI ..... Petitioner Through:

Ms. Swaty Singh Malik and Ms.

Muskan Gupta, Adv.

versus DR. PROMILA MALHOTRA & ORS ..... Respondent Through:

Mrs. Suparna Srivastava, CGSC with Mr. Tushar Mathur, Adv for R-2&3

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

O R D E R

% 01.09.2017 C.M. Nos.31820-21/2017 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 7689/2017 & C.M. Nos.31819/2017 This petition has been preferred to assail the order dated 25.05.2017 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (CAT/ Tribunal) in O.A. No. 1792/2017, whereby the tribunal has put in abeyance the retirement of the respondent. The basis of the said order appears to be the earlier orders passed in similar matters. The respondent, who is serving as Chief Medical Officer (NFSG) (Homeopathy in GPMO Cadre) under the

GNCTD, which comes under the Department of AYUSH, has preferred the said O.A. raising the issue that her retirement age stands raised to 65 years from 60 years like in the case of similarly placed employees of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (CHS Cadre).

The tribunal passed interim orders in several other OAs keeping in abeyance the superannuation of the concerned applicants. One such order is passed in O.A. No. 1051/2017 on 29.03.2017. The tribunal has, subsequently, allowed a batch of OAs including O.A. No. 2712/2016 on 24.08.2017 holding in favour of the applicants similarly situated as the respondent herein, whereby the age of superannuation stands revised to 65 years.

In view of the aforesaid position, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. Dismissed.

VIPIN SANGHI, J REKHA PALLI, J SEPTEMBER 01, 2017 sr