Delhi High Court

Disengaged Delhi Assembly Research Centre Fellows Moves HC Seeking Reinstatement

Disengaged Delhi Assembly Research Centre fellows approached the Delhi High Court on Thursday, urging it to reinstate its earlier direction for the continuation of their services.

These professionals had previously challenged the termination of their services and are now seeking payment for the period they have already served.

A bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad asked the respondent authorities – the Legislative Assembly Secretariat, Finance Department, and Services Department – to provide their stand and instructed their counsel to seek instructions.

Last month, the court had vacated its interim direction for the continuation of the fellows’ services, stating that after the Supreme Court declined to stay the terminations, propriety demanded that the high court should not have issued the interim order. The counsel for the petitioners argued that the Supreme Court had clarified that the issue was never considered, and the interim order should be reinstated. The court directed that the matter be listed for hearing next week.

On September 21, the court had directed that the services of the terminated fellows with the Delhi Assembly Research Centre should continue until December 6, and stipends would be paid to them. The services of these fellows were terminated prematurely, and they argued that this was done in an arbitrary and illegal manner. They claimed that the discontinuation of their services and non-payment of stipends violated their fundamental rights and constituted a “colourable exercise of power.”

The fellows asserted that the interference by the services and finance departments violated the doctrine of separation of powers since the Delhi Assembly Research Centre operates under the aegis of the legislative assembly and the speaker. They contended that their services could not be terminated in the manner they were, and that the Delhi legislative assembly and the city government were bound by their promise to engage the petitioners as per the terms of their service.

 

Nunnem Gangte

Recent Posts

Defamation Case: “Raut Didn’t Take Care & Caution, Caused Complainant Agony”- Mumbai Court

A Mumbai court has convicted Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut in a defamation case…

6 hours ago

1984 Anti-Sikh Riots Tytler Case: Delhi Court Records Statement Of Lakhvinder Kaur

The Rouse Avenue court on Thursday recorded the emotional testimony of Lakhvinder Kaur, widow of…

6 hours ago

Satyendar Jain Says Probe In Money Laundering Case Incomplete, Seeks Default Bail In Delhi HC

Former minister Satyendar Jain, currently in jail, urged the Delhi High Court on Thursday to…

6 hours ago

Tirupati Laddus Row: SC To Hear Pleas Seeking Court-Monitored Probe On Oct 4

The Supreme Court is set to hear a series of petitions on Friday regarding the…

7 hours ago

SC Scraps Caste-Based Discrimination In Prisons, Terms It Unconstitutional

The Supreme Court on Thursday delivered a groundbreaking judgment on Thursday, declaring caste-based discrimination in…

7 hours ago

Mahadev Betting App Case: SC Gives Bail To Chhattisgarh Businessman

The Supreme Court on Thursday has granted bail to Chhattisgarh businessman Sunil Dammani, who was…

7 hours ago