Union Of India And Anr vs Syed Sajid Ali
2026 Latest Caselaw 1462 Del

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1462 Del
Judgement Date : 13 March, 2026

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court

Union Of India And Anr vs Syed Sajid Ali on 13 March, 2026

Author: C. Hari Shankar

Bench: C. Hari Shankar

                  $~1
                  *         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                  +         W.P.(C) 9911/2017
                            UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.                   .....Appellants
                                          Through: Mr. P.S. Singh, CGSC with Ms.
                                          Annu Singh, Mr. Rajneesh K. Sharma, Ms.
                                          Shivangi Sharma and Ms. Prachi, Advs.


                                                versus

                            SYED SAJID ALI                                  .....Respondent
                                                Through:      Ms. Smriti Ahuja and Ms. Sahil
                                                Khan, Advs.
                            CORAM:
                            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
                            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL
                                                ORDER (ORAL)

                  %                               13.03.2026

                  C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

                  CM APPL. 57862/2025 (Exemption)

1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application stands disposed of.

3. This application seeks condonation of delay of 131 days in filing the review petition.

4. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay is condoned. The application is allowed.

REVIEW PET. 472/2025 & CM APPL. 57863/2025

5. We have heard Mr. Singh on the review petition. Mr. Singh submits that as he understands the order under review, this Court has approved the setting aside of the entire period of suspension of the respondent starting from 3 October 2012.

6. We have clearly held, in para 15 of our judgment, that the first extension of the respondent's suspension, as well as all subsequent extensions of the respondent's suspension, were illegal. The first extension of the respondent's suspension was on 3/4 January 2013. We have, therefore, only held the period of suspension of the respondent after 3/4 January 2013 to be illegal.

7. Our order is clear. No occasion arises for any clarification.

8. The review petition is disposed of accordingly.

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

AJAY DIGPAUL, J.

MARCH 13, 2026/AR