$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 18931/2025, CM APPL. 78820/2025, CM APPL. 78821/2025 SHRI CHAND .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shekhar Kaushik and Ms. Rashmi Kullu, Advocates with Petitioner in person. versus DELHI COMMISSION FOR WOMEN & ANR .....Respondents Through: Ms. Urvi Mohan and Mr. Sumit Kumar, Advocates for R-1. Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, SC for GNCTD Services with Mr. N.K. Singh, Ms. Aliza Alam and Mr. Mohnish Sehrawat, Advocates for R- 2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA O R D E R % 21.07.2026 1. The Petitioner was engaged as a Sweeper on a contractual basis with Respondent No. 1 in the year 2010, and his engagement was extended from time to time. His grievance arises from the termination of his contractual engagement pursuant to the Order dated 29th April, 2024, issued by Respondent No. 2 and the Office Order dated 21st October, 2024, issued by Respondent No. 1, which he alleges to be arbitrary and illegal. Aggrieved thereby, the Petitioner has approached this Court seeking his reinstatement in service along with consequential benefits. 2. At the outset, counsel for Respondent No. 1 raises a preliminary This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/07/2026 at 12:22:17 objection to the maintainability of the present petition. It is submitted that the Petitioner, along with 48 other contractual employees, had earlier approached this Court by way of W.P.(C) 10012/2024 seeking identical reliefs arising out of the same cause of action. The said writ petition was dismissed by this Court vide judgment dated 14th November, 2024. It is contended that the Petitioner was one of the Petitioners in the said proceedings and, therefore, cannot maintain the present petition seeking the very same reliefs. 3. Counsel for Respondent No. 1 further submits, on instructions, that the judgment dated 14th November, 2024, has been assailed before the Division Bench in LPA 159/2025, which is presently pending consideration and is listed on 28th July, 2026. 4. At the first instance, counsel for the Petitioner submitted that he was unaware of the aforesaid proceedings and further stated that the Petitioner was not a party to W.P.(C) 10012/2024. However, upon being confronted with the memo of parties in the said proceedings, counsel for the Petitioner fairly submitted that he was perhaps not fully aware of the earlier proceedings. 5. In view of the foregoing, this Court finds merit in the objection raised by Respondent No. 1. Since the Petitioner was admittedly a party to the earlier proceedings, wherein identical reliefs arising out of the same cause of action were declined by this Court, the present writ petition seeking the very same reliefs is not maintainable and cannot be entertained. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. The Petitioner shall, however, be at liberty, if so advised, to join the pending proceedings before the Division Bench in LPA 159/2025. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/07/2026 at 12:22:17 6. The petition is, accordingly, disposed of along with the pending applications. SANJEEV NARULA, J JULY 21, 2026 nk This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/07/2026 at 12:22:17