$~75 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 9063/2026 & CM APPL. 42430/2026 SURESH BARU NO 15764267P NK .....Petitioner Through: Mr. U S Maurya & Mr. S S Maurya, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Farman Ali, CGSC with Ms. Sadhana Sandhu G.P. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA O R D E R % 09.07.2026 CM APPL. 42429/2026 1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. The application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 9063/2026 3. The discharge order dated 25th February, 2026, based on the adverse health condition of the petitioner, was subjected to challenge in O.A. 1740/2026 before the Armed Forces Tribunal. 4. Vide impugned order dated 12th May, 2026, the Tribunal has directed notice in the matter and, by a reasoned order, refused to grant interim relief in favour of the petitioner. 5. The same has prompted the petitioner to approach before this Court, questioning the very decision of the Armed Forces Tribunal in not granting 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 13/07/2026 at 15:57:09 interim relief. 6. Amongst others, the grounds which are sought to be canvassed are: a. in similar matters, this Court and the Armed Forces Tribunal has granted ad-interim protection; b. that the present health condition of the petitioner can be visualized/inferred from the available medical records to show that he is fit to discharge the duties and; c. that the Tribunal committed an error in failing to appreciate the aforesaid contentions. 7. In addition to above, learned counsel for the petitioner has taken us through various documents so as to claim that the authority to discharge the petitioner from the service was not property exercised. 8. Be that as it may, we are only required to look into whether the Tribunal was justified in not granting ad-interim relief in favour of the petitioner. 9. Learned counsel for the respondent has taken us through the impugned order of the Tribunal to claim that the Tribunal can expedite the hearing of the interim relief, and having regard to the health condition of the petitioner, this Court should not cause interference, particularly by granting a stay in favour of the petitioner, which would amount to granting final relief in the matter. 10. We have tested the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner in the light of the Expert’s opinion, i.e., a neurologist. 11. While narrating the history, the neurologist has specifically noted that the petitioner suffers weakness for almost ten minutes in his upper limb. If such weakness is suffered during the course of duty, in our opinion, the 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 13/07/2026 at 15:57:09 petitioner will not be able to discharge the very duty that was entrusted to him with complete consciousness, alertness and swiftness. 12. We are not required to substitute our opinion with the Expert’s opinion. 13. In such an eventuality, the refusal on the part of the Armed Forces Tribunal to grant ad-interim relief to the petitioner cannot be faulted. 14. Apart from above, in case ad-interim relief were to be granted, the same would amount to granting final relief in the matter. 15. That being so, we refuse to cause interference in extraordinary jurisdiction. 16. The writ petition, as such, stands dismissed. 17. Pending application also stands disposed of. NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE, J AMIT SHARMA, J JULY 9, 2026/DM/ST 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 13/07/2026 at 15:57:09