Delhi High Court
W.P.(C)/7031/2026 of SHIVANI SHARMA & ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR. on 1 September 2026
7031/2026 Page 1 of 3 $~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010229622026 + W.P.(C) 7031/2026 SHIVANI SHARMA & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Animesh Kumar, Mr. Nishant Kumar, Dr. Sumit Kumar, Ms. Aprajita and Mr. Yashwardhan Singh, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA &
$~40
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CNR No. DLHC010229622026
+
W.P.(C) 7031/2026
SHIVANI SHARMA & ORS.
.....Petitioners
Through:
Mr.
Animesh
Kumar,
Mr.
Nishant Kumar, Dr. Sumit Kumar, Ms.
Aprajita and Mr. Yashwardhan Singh, Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
.....Respondents
Through:
Mr. Mukul Singh, CGSC with
Mr. Aryan Dhaka, Adv. for R-1
Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, ASG with Mr.
Nikhilesh Krishnan, Mr. Siddharth Singh
and Mr. Kartik Dey, Advs. for R-2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR
ORDER (ORAL)
%
01.09.2026
C.HARI SHANKAR, J.
CM APPL. 57595/2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. This is an application by Respondent 2 for expedited hearing of the present writ petition. During the course of arguments, Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, learned ASG appearing for the said respondent, drew our attention to para 8 of our order dated 20 May 2026, which reads thus: “8. We find from the order passed by the Tribunal that, though the Tribunal has noted the rival contentions on interim relief, albeit briefly, no decision has been taken on the prayer one way or the other. We were, therefore, inclined to remand the prayer for interim relief to the Tribunal for a decision thereon in a time bound manner protecting the petitioners in the interregnum.”
KUMAR
2. Mr. Banerjee submits, on instructions, that his client is willing to accede to the suggestion mooted in para 8 of the order dated 20 May 2026 for setting aside the order under challenge in the present petition and remanding the prayer of the petitioner for interim relief to the Central Administrative Tribunal1 for consideration de novo.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner points out that the Tribunal has already listed OA 1935/2026 for final hearing on 23 September 2026.
4. Accordingly, we dispose of this writ petition as well as the present application by setting aside the order dated 18 May 2025 under challenge in the present writ petition and remanding the petitioner’s prayer for interim relief to the Tribunal for de novo consideration on 23 September 2026.
5. We make it clear that, in case the Tribunal desires to hear the main OA on the said date, it would be within its right to do so.
6. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
7. Interim order passed by this Court to continue till the date fixed by us before the Tribunal. Needless to say, the Tribunal would consider the prayer for interim relief uninfluenced by the order under challenge in these proceedings.
1 “Tribunal” hereinafter
KUMAR
8. The next date fixed in this matter shall accordingly stand cancelled.
C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
VINOD KUMAR, J.
SEPTEMBER 1, 2026/AR
Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR