Delhi High Court
Shamim Akhtar Tamanna vs Union Of India & Anr on 29 April, 2025
Author: Navin Chawla
Bench: Navin Chawla
$~82
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 29.04.2025
+ W.P.(C) 5485/2025
SHAMIM AKHTAR TAMANNA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Amresh B., Mr. Yash
Maurya, Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Nishant Gautam, CGSC
with Mr. Abhinav Bhardwaj,
GP, Mr. Vipul Verma, Mr.
Vinay Kaushik, Mr. Prithviraj
Dey, Advs. for UOI.
Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, SC,
GNCTD with Mr. Nitesh Kr.
Singh, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR
NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 25017/2025(Exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exemptions.
W.P.(C) 5485/2025
2. This petition has been filed, praying for the following reliefs:-
"a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order, or direction to the
Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal,
Principal Bench, New Delhi to decide the issue
of challenge to the impugned suspension order
dated 08.12.2015 (Annexure P- 2) and further
quash the set aside the impugned order dated
17.07.2018 (Annexure P-5) as the same suffer
from manifest errors of illegality,
unconstitutionality and arbitrariness and
malafides; and
b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order, or direction to the
Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal,
Principal Bench, New Delhi to decide the
issues of challenge to the impugned suspension
orders dated 08.03.2024 (Annexure P- 11),
05.06.2024 (Annexure P-12) and 29.11.2024
(Annexure P- 14) as the same suffer from
manifest errors of illegality,
unconstitutionality and arbitrariness and
malafides; and/or
ALTERNATIVELY
c) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order, or direction quash the
set aside the impugned order(s) dated
08.12.2015 and 17.07.2018 (Annexure P-2 and
Annexure P-5) in Original Application No.
1615 of 2019 and the impugned suspension
orders dated 08.03.2024, 05.06.2024 and
29.11.2024 (Annexure P-11, Annexure P-12
and Annexure P-14) as the same suffer from
manifest errors of illegality,
unconstitutionality and arbitrariness and
malafides."
3. From the above prayer, it appears that the petitioner wishes for
this Court, in exercise of its power under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, to govern the calendar of the learned Central
Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal'). The
Supreme Court in Allahabad High Court Bar Assn. v. State of U.P.
& Ors., (2024) 6 SCC 267, has held that in the ordinary course, the
Constitutional Courts should refrain from fixing a time-bound
schedule for the disposal of cases pending before any other Courts.
We may quote from the said Judgment as under:
"47.3. Constitutional courts, in the ordinary
course, should refrain from fixing a time-
bound schedule for the disposal of cases
pending before any other courts.
Constitutional courts may issue directions for
the time-bound disposal of cases only in
exceptional circumstances. The issue of
prioritising the disposal of cases should be
best left to the decision of the courts concerned
where the cases are pending;"
4. In view of the above, we cannot govern the listing of matters
before the learned Tribunal or direct that priority be accorded to some
case over another. The petitioner can make the request made in the
prayers before us, to the learned Tribunal and we are sure that the
learned Tribunal will consider the same in accordance with law.
5. The petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J
RENU BHATNAGAR, J
APRIL 29, 2025/ab/mn/ik
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
