$~30 to 34 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 03.09.2026 # CNR No. DLHC010645702024 + W.P.(C) 13430/2024 CM APPL. 56136/2024 UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Satya Ranjan Swain CGSC with Mr Kautilya Birat GP and Mr Sanskar Gupta with Mr Tushar Hazrati, Advocates. versus MAM CHAND .....Respondent Through: Mr Yogesh Sharma, Ms. Sonika and Mr Piyush Sharma, Advocates. # CNR No. DLHC010156552024 + W.P.(C) 4443/2024 CM APPL. 18226/2024 UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Himanshu Pathak, SPC along with Mr Mohit Gupta, Advocates versus BAL KISHAN & ORS. .....Respondent Through: Mr Yogesh Sharma, Ms Sonika and Mr. Piyush Sharma, Advocates. # CNR No. DLHC010218222024 + W.P.(C) 5814/2024 CM APPL. 24074/2024 UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF POSTS & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Himanshu Pathak, SPC along with Mr. Mohit Gupta, Advocates. versus RAM SAGAR .....Respondent Through: # CNR No. DLHC010322382024 + W.P.(C) 7735/2024 CM APPL. 32101/2024 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Vivek Goyal, Advocate, CGSPC Mr. Aryan Aggarwal, Adv. versus VINOD DUTT SHARMA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr Yogesh Sharma, Ms Sonika and Mr. Piyush Sharma, Advocates. # CNR No. DLHC010353102024 + W.P.(C) 8530/2024 CM APPL. 35001/2024 UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Vivek Goyal, Advocate, CGSPC Mr. Aryan Aggarwal, Adv. versus SH. DHARAMVIR SINGH .....Respondent Through: Mr. Yogesh Sharma, Ms. Sonika and Mr. Piyush Sharma, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA V. KAMESWAR RAO, J. (ORAL) 1. These writ petitions have been primarily filed by the petitioners with the following prayers: In W.P.(C) 13430/2024 “(i) issue an appropriate writ, order or direction thereby setting aside the Impugned Orders dated 15.04.2024 and 11.11.2022 passed by the Hon’ble CAT, (PB) New Delhi, in RA No. 75/2023 and OA No. 112/2017 titled “Union of India & Ors. Vs Mam Chand”; and/or (ii) Pass any such other or further orders in the interest of justice as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in favour of the Petitioners” In W.P.(C) 4443/2024 “a. issue the Writs/Orders/Directions in nature of certiorari, thereby quashing or setting aside the order/judgment dated 29.05.2023 and 07.12.2023 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in Original Application . No. 2494 of 2019 and in Review Application No. 154 of 2023 respectively titled "Sh. Bal Kishan and Ors Versus Union of India & Anr.” In W.P.(C) 5814/2024 “a. Issue the Writs/Orders/Directions in nature of Certiorari, thereby quashing or setting aside the order/judgment dated 29.05.2023 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred as tribunal) in Original Application No. 820 of 2022 titled titled "Sh. Ram Sagar Versus Union of India &Ors” In W.P.(C) 7735/2024 “(i) issue an appropriate writ, order or direction thereby setting aside the Impugned Order dated 02.12.2023 passed by Principal Bench of Ld. CAT, New Delhi, in OA No. 2003/2021 Tilted "Vinod Dutt Sharma & Ors vs Union of India & Ors; and/or (ii) Pass any such other or further orders in the interest of justice as it may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.” In W.P.(C) 8530/2024 “(i) issue an· appropriate writ, order or direction thereby setting aside the Impugned Order dated 31.01.2023 passed by Principal Bench ofLd. CAT, New Delhi, in OA No.27/2017, Sh. Dharamvir Singhvs Union of India&Anr.; and/or (ii) Pass any such other or further orders in the interest of justice as it may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.” 2. In fact, the challenge in these petitions is primarily to the orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, allowing the original applications filed by the respondents herein and dismissing the review petitions (in some cases) filed by the Union of India. In substance, the Tribunal has granted relief to the respondents by directing the grant of financial upgradation. 3. At the outset, it may be stated here that we had decided a similar issue in W.P.(C) 11957/2023, Union of India and Ors. v. Kapoor Singh on 04.08.2026 by dismissing the writ petition filed by the Union of India and Others by stating in paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 as under: “2. The learned counsel for the respondent state that an identical issue was the subject matter of a civil appeal and SLPs before the Supreme Court, which include Civil Appeal no. 4432/2019 and SLP(C) nos. 11997/2019, 26561/2019, 24722/2019, 23649/2019, 611/2020, 1123/2022, 14072/2022, 23334/2022, 3215/2025, 18660/2025, 18655/2025, 27356/2025, 38239/2025 and 3701-3703/2026 wherein the Supreme Court has dismissed the Civil Appeal No. 4432/2019, Union of India & Ors. v. E Sreeramulu. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners though seeks some time to look into this aspect and take instructions, we are of the view that the same may not be necessary since the Civil Appeal No. 4432/2019 has been dismissed, more so, there is no denial to the fact that the said appeal and the connected SLPs relate to the same issue i.e., whether the appointment as Postman should be construed as vide direct recruitment or promotion. The conclusion drawn is that the appointment as Postman is by way of a direct recruitment. It is also necessary to state here that on 12.09.2023, we had passed the following order in the present writ petition:- “1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that issue which falls for decision in this petition is also pending consideration before the Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) No. 26561/2019. In fact, certain matters including W.P.(C) 7504/2013 titled as Laxmi Dutt Kaushik v. Union of India and Ors. and connected petitions have been directed to be adjourned sine die. 2. Issue notice to the respondent returnable on March 21, 2024. 3. Till the next date of hearing, there shall be stay of the impugned Order dated January 31, 2023 passed in O.A. No. 116/2021.” 4. The orders as handed over to us by learned counsel for the respondent would also show that SLP(C) no. 26561/19 has also been decided by the Supreme Court whereby the Supreme Court has allowed the said appeal by stating in the order dated 24.02.2026 as under:- “1) Leave granted. 2) In consequence of the aforesaid order of dismissal of Civil Appeal No. 4432 of 2019 and connected matters, the impugned orders of the respective High Courts stand set aside. Consequently, these appeals stand allowed with direction to the respondents to comply with the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal as expeditiously as possible, not later than three months. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.” 5. If that be so, the present writ petition filed by the petitioners being covered by the orders of the Supreme Court, the same is liable to be dismissed. We order accordingly.” 4. Though, Mr. Satya Ranjan Swain learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the petitioners would submit that in Union of India & Ors. v. E Sreeramulu, Civil Appeal No. 4432/2019 and other connected matters, the Supreme Court left the question of law open and as such determination by the Central Administrative Tribunal or this Court in different writ petitions shall have no applicability and the issue needs to be considered afresh. 5. We are unable to agree with the said submission by Mr. Swain, more particularly, when on a specific query to Mr. Swain whether the petitioners have implemented the orders of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. E Sreeramulu (supra) and in Union of India & Ors. v. Suresh Chander Sharma & Ors., W.P.(C) 7757/2016 decided on 25.03.2026, Union of India & Ors. v. Naresh Chand Sharma & Ors. W.P.(C) 11120/2023 decided on 28.03.2026 and also Union of India and Ors. v. Kapoor Singh, W.P.(C) 11957/2023 decided on 04.08.2026, the answer is in the affirmative. 6. If that be so, when the Supreme Court and this Court were concerned with the same department i.e., Department of Post and also the employees are similarly placed like the respondents herein, a different view cannot be taken. For parity of reasons, we dismiss the writ petitions being without any merit. 7. The orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal shall be implemented within a period of 8 weeks from today and if the benefits are not released within three months, interest at the rate of 8% shall be paid to the respondents. 8. The pending applications are also dismissed as having become infructuous. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J SEPTEMBER 03, 2026 rt W.P.(C) 13430/2024 & Ors. Page 1 of 7