Jitender vs Shaheed Bhagat Singh College & Anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Orders Decided May 04, 2026

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1270634

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1270634
Court: Delhi Orders High Court
Judge: Hon'Ble Mr. Justice V. Kameswar Rao,Hon'Ble Ms. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
Decided On: May 04, 2026
Case Number: W.P.(C)/13390/2025
Subject: MRTP

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

MRTP

Key legal issue: MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jitender

Advocate Mr. Raghavendra Mohan Bajaj, Mr. Shagun Agarwal, Mr. Sarvesh Bisaria, Mr. Ashutosh Singh, Mr. GK Pathak

Respondent

Shaheed Bhagat Singh College & Anr.

Advocate Mr. Mohinder Rupal

Excerpt

.....respondent/ university of delhi that, as per the counter affidavit filed by the university of delhi, the relevant rules have been amended whereby the appeal in respect of group c and b employees (non- teaching staff) shall lie before the dean of the colleges, whereas, the vice chancellor shall be the appellate authority for the group a employees.3. on this mr. sarvesh bisaria, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioners herein shall avail the remedy before the concerned appellate authority in terms of the amended rules.4. mr. bisaria and mr. raghavendra mohan bajaj, counsel for thepetitioners submits that in view of the amended rules, these petitions be treated as appeal against the order of the penalty imposed on petitioners to the respective appellate authorities to consider and pass appropriate orders.5. if that be so, we direct the respondents to consider these petitions as an appeal to the respective appellate authorities and decide the same, in accordance with law within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.6. the appellate authority shall pass a detailed and a reasoned order byconsidering all the grounds which have been taken by the petitioners in these petitions. it goes without saying if the petitioners have any grievance on the orders passed by the appellate authority, they are at liberty to seek such remedy as available in law.7. the petitions are disposed of.8. the pending application(s) is also disposed of as having become infructuous.9. order dasti. v. kameswar rao, j manmeet pritam singh arora, j may 4, 2026 rt

Full Judgment

$~24 & 25
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 13390/2025 CM APPL. 29632/2026 JITENDER .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Raghavendra Mohan Bajaj, Mr. Shagun Agarwal and Petitioner in person SHAHEED BHAGAT SINGH COLLEGE & ANR. .....Respondents + W.P.(C) 14152/2025 ARADHNA GUPTA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sarvesh Bisaria, Adv. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Mr. Ashutosh Singh along with Mr. GK Pathak, Advs. for Respondent No.2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

ORDER

% 04.05.2026

1. These petitions have been filed primarily on the ground that the

Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority are the same i.e., the Governing Body, and it is in violation of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

2. Today, we have been informed by Mr. Mohinder Rupal, learned

counsel for the respondent/ University of Delhi that, as per the counter affidavit filed by the University of Delhi, the relevant rules have been amended whereby the Appeal in respect of Group C and B employees (non- teaching staff) shall lie before the Dean of the Colleges, whereas, the Vice Chancellor shall be the appellate authority for the Group A employees.

3. On this Mr. Sarvesh Bisaria, learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioners herein shall avail the remedy before the concerned Appellate Authority in terms of the amended rules.

4. Mr. Bisaria and Mr. Raghavendra Mohan Bajaj, counsel for the

petitioners submits that in view of the amended rules, these petitions be treated as appeal against the order of the penalty imposed on petitioners to the respective Appellate Authorities to consider and pass appropriate orders.

5. If that be so, we direct the respondents to consider these petitions as an appeal to the respective Appellate Authorities and decide the same, in accordance with law within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

6. The appellate authority shall pass a detailed and a reasoned order by

considering all the grounds which have been taken by the petitioners in these petitions. It goes without saying if the petitioners have any grievance on the orders passed by the Appellate Authority, they are at liberty to seek such remedy as available in law.

7. The petitions are disposed of.

8. The pending application(s) is also disposed of as having become infructuous.

9. Order dasti. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J MAY 4, 2026 rt

Same Court & Year Delhi Orders · 2026 Same Parties Jitender vs Shaheed Bhagat Singh College & Anr. Same Subject MRTP Same Judge Hon'Ble Mr. Justice V. Kameswar Rao,Hon'Ble Ms. Justice Manme...