The Delhi High Court has dismissed the Review Petition filed by the Union of India in the promotion matter of IRS officer Sameer Wankhede, upholding the earlier order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi.
The bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Justice Madhu Jain not only rejected the Review Petition but also imposed a cost of Rs. 20,000, directing that the same be deposited in the Delhi High Court Advocates’ Welfare Fund.
“We expect that the petitioner as a state would disclose all facts truthfully before filing the petition…For this, we dismiss the present review petition with a cost of ₹20,000… This message has to be sent,” the Court said.
The Bench further made strong observations against the conduct of the department, stating that a clear message must go to the authorities concerned that such practices in service matters cannot be countenanced.
The Court observed that the department’s repeated attempts to obstruct the promotion of the officer despite clear judicial directions reflect a disturbing trend that must be firmly discouraged. The Court deprecated the conduct of the department, remarking that such behaviour erodes administrative fairness and transparency.
It further affirmed that the CAT’s order directing consideration of Wankhede’s promotion in accordance with law stands unaltered.
Background
Last year, the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC), constituted to consider eligible ad-hoc officers for regular promotion to the post of Joint Commissioner, had placed Sameer Wankhede’s case in a sealed cover. The committee cited pending investigations by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED), along with ongoing departmental proceedings against him.
However, in December 2024, the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) directed that the sealed cover be opened. The Tribunal further ordered that if Wankhede’s name was recommended by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), the Central government must promote him to the post of Joint Commissioner with retrospective effect from January 2021.
The Central government challenged this order, but the High Court dismissed its petition on August 28, 2025. A review petition against the dismissal was subsequently heard by the Court.
In its review plea, the government argued that after the Court had reserved its judgment on July 29 and before it was pronounced on August 28, departmental proceedings had been formally initiated against Wankhede. It contended that the High Court’s earlier order was based on the assumption that no chargesheet existed against him.
“Since that assumption was demonstrably incorrect on the date of pronouncement, a review is warranted to prevent manifest injustice and to align the relief with the correct factual position,” the government submitted.
Upon examining the matter, the High Court observed that the government had failed to inform it that the CAT had stayed the departmental proceedings against Wankhede by an order passed in August 2025. The Court noted that this order was issued before the review petition was filed, yet the fact was not disclosed.
Advocates T. Singh Dev, Jatin Parashar, and Shadaab Anwar represented Sameer Wankhede, while the Central government was represented by Central Government Standing Counsel (CGSC) Ashish Dixit.
