Central Administrative Tribunal
Rakesh Kumar vs Govt. Of Nctd on 2 November 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.
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH 61/35, COPERNICUS MARG,NEW DELHI-110001 Order Sheet Item no.: 44 O.A./2118/2017 (DELHI) [ TERMINATION ] Court No.: 3 No of Adjournment: 44 Order Dated: 02/11/2026 RAKESH KUMAR Vs GOVT. OF NCTD
For Applicant(s) Advocate : Mr. Sachin Chauhan For Respondent(s) Advocate : Mr. Amit Yadav with Dr. Monika Bhargava and Mr. M Rehan, Mr. Amardeep Singh Order of The Tribunal This is a case where the applicant was offered appointment as Grade IV (DASS)/LDC on 26.06.2026. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that, at the time of joining, the applicant was required to submit an attestation form disclosing details of any FIRs/criminal cases pending against him. However, the applicant did not furnish any details against Column No. 15(i) of the attestation form. The applicant was nevertheless able to join the department and was placed on probation.
2. Thereafter, when it was found that the applicant had tampered with the departmental records to subsequently include the details of the FIR pending against him, the impugned order of termination was issued under Rule 5 of the CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that interim protection was granted to the applicant vide order dated 04.07.2017 and, in view of the said protection, the applicant is still continuing in service. However, his services have not been confirmed and he continues to remain on probation. Certain criminal cases are also pending against the applicant.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he would like to seek instructions regarding the latest developments in the criminal cases pending against the applicant and, accordingly, seeks an adjournment.
5. We note that considerable time has elapsed since the institution of the present OA. Although the basic facts have been explained by learned counsel for the respondents, both sides need to come prepared with updated instructions and the latest developments in the criminal cases.
6. In view of the above, let this matter be listed as 'Part Heard' on 18.12.2026.
7. Interim order, if any, shall continue till the next date of hearing.
Dr. Sumeet Jerath Member (A) Harvinder Kaur Oberoi Member (J) Sourjya Sobhaniya ( steno 'c' )