| SooperKanoon Citation | sooperkanoon.com/1260870 |
| Subject | Education |
| Court | Delhi High Court |
| Decided On | Feb-12-2026 |
| Case Number | CONT.CAS(C)/389/2025 |
| Judge | Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Sachin Datta |
| Appellant | Krishan Kumar Singhal |
| Respondent | Sh. Govind Mohan & Anr. |
| Advocates: | Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, Ms. Pinky Pawar, Ms. Himanshi Singh, Ms. Shiva Lakshmi, Mr. Madhav Bajaj, Ms. Avshreya Pratap Singh Rudy, Mr. Ankit Khatri, Ms. Usha Jamnal, Ms. Nyasa Sharma |
$~3 to 7
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CONT.CAS(C) 384/2025 and CM APPL.9839/2026 (delay) DHARAMVIR SINGH .....Petitioner + CONT.CAS(C) 386/2025 AMRIT SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, CGSC alongwith Ms. Pinky Pawar, GP and Ms. Himanshi Singh, Advocates. + CONT.CAS(C) 389/2025 and CM APPLs.9725/2026, 9728/2026 KRISHAN KUMAR SINGHAL .....Petitioner SH. GOVIND MOHAN & ANR. .....Respondents + CONT.CAS(C) 427/2025 ISHWAR SINGH YADAV .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Shiva Lakshmi and Mr. Madhav Bajaj, Advocates.
+ CONT.CAS(C) 429/2025 MOHAN SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Avshreya Pratap Singh Rudy, CGSC alongwith Mr. Ankit Khatri, Ms. Usha Jamnal and Ms. Nyasa Sharma, Advocates. Inspector Athurv, CRPF and HC Anil Kumar, CRPF.
% 12.02.2026
1. The present petitions allege non-compliance of the directions
contained in the judgement/ order dated 05.03.2015 in W.P.(C) 972/2015 (and connected matters), order dated 17.04.2015 in W.P. (C) 3734/2015 (and connected matters), and order dated 28.08.2015 in W.P. (C) 8168/2015 (and connected matters), whereby, the respondents were directed to grant the petitioners the benefits of the second ACP.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that although the
respondents have purported to grant the benefit of ACP Scheme to the petitioners, the same has not been done in consonance with the provisions of the said Scheme, thereby resulting in infraction of the directions contained in the aforesaid judgment/orders dated 05.03.2015, 17.04.2015 and 28.08.2015.
3. Attention is drawn to the fact that in terms of the ACP Scheme, the
financial upgradation is required to be given to the next higher grade in
accordance with the “existing hierarchy in the cadre/category of post”. It is submitted that instead of granting upgradation to the petitioners to the next higher grade, these petitioners have been sought to be granted upgradation to the post of ASI which was not even in existence on the relevant date with effect from which the ACP benefits have been sought to be given to the petitioners.
4. It is submitted that the post of ASI was created only post 2010. At the
relevant point of time, the petitioners were required to be financially upgraded as to the pay grade applicable to the next higher post i.e. Sub- Inspector (SI).
5. In light thereof, the respondents are directed to re-consider/re-visit the
Office Order dated 30.06.2025 whereby the ACP benefits have been sought to be granted to the present petitioners.
6. Let an opportunity of hearing be given by the concerned officials to
the petitioners and pass orders thereafter. Let the aforesaid exercise be concluded within a period of 4 weeks from today.
7. The present petitions stand disposed of in the above terms. Pending
applications also stand disposed of.
8. In case the petitioners are aggrieved by the outcome of the aforesaid
exercise, they shall be at liberty to avail appropriate remedies in accordance with law/revive the present petitions. Petitioners are also at liberty to submit a note of submissions for the assistance of the concerned officials.
FEBRUARY 12, 2026/at