Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd vs. Jaspreet Dhingra

Court:Supreme Court of India
Judge:Hon'ble Ahsanuddin Amanullah
Case Status:Disposed
Order Date:15 Apr 2025
CNR:SCIN010168852025

AI Summary

Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order

Order Issued After Hearing

Purpose:

FRESH

Before:

Hon'ble Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Hon'ble Prashant Kumar Mishra

Stage:

FRESH (FOR ADMISSION) - CIVIL CASES

Remarks:

Disposed off

Listed On:

15 Apr 2025

In:

Judge

Category:

UNKNOWN

Interlocutory Applications:

87480/2025,87482/2025

Original Order Copy

Get a certified copy of this order

Download True Copy

Order Text

COURT NO.17

SECTION XIV

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).9843/2025

[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 17-02-2025 in WP(C) No.1810/2025 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhil

DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD. & ORS. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

JASPREET DHINGRA & ORS.

Respondent $(s)$

(IA No. 87480/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 87482/2025 - PERMISSION TO PLACE ADDITIONAL FACTS AND GROUNDS)

Date: 15-04-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA

For Petitioner(s) Mr. P. S. Patwalia, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shashank Kumar Vemulakonda, AOR Mr. V. S. R. Krishna, Adv. Mr. V. Shashank Kumar, Adv.

For Respondent(s)

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

In the facts and circumstances of the present case, we are not inclined to interfere with the matter and even after looking at the ature Not Verified with the end result would that the end result would be the same i.e., the respondents/original applicants have made out a case for their appointment on the post in question. The other

question with regard to retrospectivity is also noted to be rejected on the principle that for no fault, the concerned respondents have suffered and their entitlement to consequential benefits from the date any person appointed on the post pursuant to the same exercise is reiterated. However, we make it clear that the observations made in paragraphs no.36 and 41 of the impugned judgment with regard to course of action to be adopted in future transactions is concerned, the same shall not be binding on the petitioners and would depend on the facts and circumstances of the case as it emerges in future.

2. With aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed of. 3. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)

(SAPNA BISHT) (ANJALI PANWAR)