W .P.(C) 14008/2024 Page 1 of 4 $~ 69 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 10.09.2025 + W .P.(C) 14008/2024 RAHUL KUM AR ...Petitioner Through: M r.Ankit Singh Sinsinw ar & M r.Ravi Kumar, Advs . versus NEW DELHI M UNICIPAL COUNCIL & ORS. ...Respo ndents Through: M r.Vaibhav Agnihotri, ASC/NDM C with M r.Vidit Prat ap Singh, M r.Ankit Singh & Ms.Suruchi Khandelwal, Advs . CORAM : HON'BLE M R. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAW LA HON'BLE M S. JUSTICE M ADHU JAIN NAVIN CHAW LA, J. (ORAL) 1. This petition has ben filed, chall enging the Order dated 12.09.2024 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, 3ULQFLSDO%HQFK1HZ'HOKLKHUHLQDI in C.P. No. 656/2024 in O.A. No. 2679/2024 , titled Rahul Kumar v. Sh. Naresh Kumar & Ors. , dismi ssing the Contempt Petition filed by the petitioner herein, while reserving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the subsequent order dated 09.08.2024, on all the grounds including that have ben taken by the petitioner in O.A. No. 2679/2024. 2. To give a b rief background of the facts in which the present petition arises, the petitioner was appointed as a Casual Labour W .P.(C) 14008/2024 Page 2 of 4 (Temporary M uster Roll) in the Horticulture Department of the respondents on 26.11.209. He worked on the same with intermittent breaks and , on 04.05.2023, was appointed as Palika Sahayak (Udhyan) by the respondent s. The terms of his appointment, inter alia , were that the petitioner shall work on the said post for a two -year probation period. Alleging certain misconduct by the petitioner, the respondents served a notice of termination, vide order dated 14.06.2024, on the petitioner under Rule 5(1)(a) of the CS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached the learned Tribunal by way of O.A. No. 2679/2024. The learned Tribunal, by an ad interim Order dated 12.07.2024, stayed the operation of the order dated 14.06.2024 till the next date of hearing. 3. It is the case of the respondent s that the respondent s were advised that the order dated 14.06.2024 was stigmatic in nature and it must withdraw the same and pass a fresh orde r. Acordingly, it withdrew the order dated 14.06.2024, vide order dated 07.08.2024, and passed a fresh termination order terminating the service s of the petitioner on 09.08.2024. 4. The petitioner approached the learned Tribunal by way of the above Contempt Petition, alleging that the respondents had , by withdrawing the order dated 14.06.2024 and passing a fresh termination order dated 09.08.2024, violated the interim Order dated 12.07.2024 passed by the learned Tribunal. 5. The learned Tribunal has dismissed the Contempt Petition, inter alia , observing therein that the order dated 09.08.2024, gives a fresh