Delhi High Court
Megha Sharma vs Union Of India & Ors. on 3 April, 2024
Author: Tushar Rao Gedela
Bench: Tushar Rao Gedela
$~51
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 03.04.2024
+ W.P.(C) 12152/2023 & CM APPL. 47759/2023
MEGHA SHARMA ..... Petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr.Amit Gupta, Mr.Prateek Mehta, Mr.
Shiv Verma, Mr. Anshul Luthra and
Mr. Chirag Vohra, Advocates
For the Respondent : Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG with Mr.
Ravi Prakash, CGSC with Ms. Astu
Khandelwal, Mr.Y. Shukl and Ms.
Taha Yasin, Advocates with Ms.
Monica Mehra Officer for R-1
Mr. Farman Ali and Ms. Usha,
Advocates for R-2
Mr. Saurabh Mishra, Ms. Bhumi
Agrwal and Ms. Aasnaa Bhatia,
Advocates for R-3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
JUDGMENT
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J. (ORAL)
[ The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid mode ]
1. This is an application seeking early hearing of the petition.
2. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed.
W.P.(C) 12152/2023
3. With the consent of the parties, the present petition is taken up for
disposal today.
4. After some arguments, Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned CGSC has
handed over the bench a letter addressed to him by the Under Secretary
to the Govt. of India dated 27.03.2024 wherein the two queries put by
this Court to the learned CGSC on 18.03.2024 have been responded to
by way of comments.
5. The relevant portion of the letter dated 27.03.2024 is extracted as
under:-
Sl. Query / Observation Comments of the Department
No. of Hon'ble Court
1. Whether the At the outset, it is necessary to
mention here that Consultancy Contract
termination letter
was executed between the Petitioner
issued to the and Respondent no.3 (EdCIL) and there
was no contract signed between the
Petitioner is non-
Respondent nos. 1 and 2 and the
stigmatic and will not Petitioner.
It is stated that the termination
have a bearing on the
order was issued by the Respondent
Petitioner's future no.3 i.e. EdCIL to the petitioner, in
employment avenues furtherance of the view of minutes of
in any Government evaluation of consultants, D/o SE&L,
MoE issued the letter dated 11.09.2023
Department including to the EdCIL.
the present Ministry.
However, it is pertinent to
mention here that the termination letter
issued by the respondent no.3 EdCIL to
the petitioner does not contain any
stipulation or clauses that restrict
him/her from seeking employment in
any other government/private
department, including the current
Ministry.
This absence of such constraints
indicates that the termination letter does
not impose any impediments on the
consultant's ability to explore new
opportunities within the government
sector or the private sector etc.
Thus, it is evident that the
termination letter does not debar the
consultant from applying for other
positions or pursuing avenues for career
advancement.
6. After having considered the arguments addressed as also perusing
the contents of the office order dated 14.09.2023, this Court is of the
opinion that the said dis-engagement of the petitioner vide the aforesaid
office order is absolutely non-stigmatic. That apart keeping in view the
comments that has been tendered by the department by way of letter
dated 27.03.2024 to the learned CGSC, it appears that department also
does not have any objection and according to them the said letter does
not contain any stipulation or clause that restrict her i.e. the petitioner
from seeking employment in any other government /private department,
including the current Ministry.
7. To the mind of this Court, the aforesaid comments of the
department make it even more clearer that the dis-engagement of the
petitioner's services by the office order dated 14.09.2023 is non-
stigmatic. Moreover, the aforesaid comments also keep the option and
avenues of the petitioner open to seek employment of any nature in any
other government / private department, including the current Ministry.
8. In that view of the matter, the petition is disposed of by observing
as under:-
(i) The order dated 14.09.2023 is absolutely non-stigmatic;
(ii) The petitioner does not face any restriction from seeking
employment in any other government / private department,
including the current Ministry, i.e., Ministry of Education.
9. In that view of the matter, Mr.Gupta, learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner submits on instructions that the petitioner is satisfied.
10. In view of above, the petition is disposed of alongwith the
pending application.
11. The letter dated 27.03.2024 is taken on record.
12. The next date, i.e. 26.07.2024 stands cancelled.
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J.
APRIL 03, 2024
ms
