In a couple of applications filed before the Delhi High Court to challenge an order dated 16-02-2026 by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) and to seek a stay of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Subordinate Service (Second Amendment) Rules, 2024 (GNCTDSS Rules, 2024) or Departmental Promotional Committee (DPC) for the post of Senior Scale (GNCTDSS) in DASS cadre, a Division Bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora allowed DPC to do its task but held that the conclusion would be subject to the outcome of the present petitions.

By original applications before CAT, the respondents’ action to abolish nearly 217 posts meant for the Delhi, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Lakshwadeep, Daman & Diu, and Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Civil Services (DANICS) as well as the Indian Administrative Services (IAS) cadre and to make them available to Grade I officers of the Delhi Administrative Subordinate Secretariat Service (DASS).

The petitioners were directly recruited DANICS officers who claimed that no cadre review for DANICS had been executed since 2009. In 2015, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) approved GNCTD’s proposal for the upgradation of the pay scale of the Grade-I DASS cadre from level-7 to level-8. It was asserted that the pay upgradation granted to Grade-I DASS officers was solely for them. Thereafter, Grade-I DASS officers demanded the creation of a Group A post in the DASS cadre, a demand accepted by the Delhi Cabinet in 2015.

In the interim, to alleviate severe promotional stagnation within the DASS cadre, the GNCTD sent a proposal to the MHA to restructure DASS. This culminated in an MHA “No Objection” letter dated 24-08-2023, followed by a DASS restructuring order dated 10-11-2023, whereby it was decided that 217 posts would be incorporated at Pay Level – 11 and filled through the promotion of officers in Grade-I DASS. Consequently, on 24-12-2024, the GNCTD issued a notification enacting the GNCTD Subordinate Service (Second Amendment) Rules, 2024. This amendment created a parallel “Senior Scale” consisting of 217 Group ‘A’ posts at Pay Level-11 within the DASS cadre, absorbing ex-cadre posts that had historically been manned by DANICS/IAS officers.

ALSO READ: Himachal Pradesh High Court: Ad Hoc Promotion Made As Stop-Gap Arrangement Does Not Confer Vested Right To Seniority From Ad Hoc Service Date

Aggrieved by the creation of Group ‘A’ posts outside the standard DANICS channel, the petitioners approached the CAT. On 16-02-2026, the CAT dismissed the OAs, holding that the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi (LG) possessed valid legislative competence under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution to frame recruitment rules and restructure cadres in the absence of local legislation. The petitioners challenged this final order before the Court via writ petitions and sought an emergency ad-interim stay on the operation of the 2024 Amendment Rules and the upcoming Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) scheduled for 12-06-2026.

The Court noted that the primary issue at this stage was strictly limited to whether the scheduled promotional DPC should be stayed. On a prima facie evaluation, the Court agreed with the legal conclusions drawn by CAT regarding the LG’s competence to issue the notification under the constitutional framework. Further, the Court noted that the petitioners had failed to produce any notification indicating that the 217 disputed posts had ever been formally integrated into the core DANICS cadre strength.

Hence, the Court declined to grant a total stay on the DPC and disposed of the stay applications by permitting the DPC scheduled for 12-06-2026 to proceed with and conclude its promotional task. However, the Court balanced equities by ordering that the final conclusions would remain strictly subject to the final outcome of the petitions. The Court mandated that the government obtain formal written undertakings from all promoted DASS officers, binding them to revert to their original posts without claiming any equitable rights if the DANICS petitioners ultimately succeed in the main litigation. Lastly, the parties were directed to submit written arguments within six weeks.

The petitions have been re-notified on 19-08-2026.

ALSO READ: Rajasthan High Court: Medical Officers Who Opted Out of Non-Practicing Allowance Cannot Seek Pay Parity With Junior Doctor Granted Special Pay Fixation

Appearances:
W.P.(C) 6651/2026
For Petitioners – Mr. Abhaya Kumar Behera (Sr. Adv), Ms. Amita Singh Kalkal, Ms. Aditi Gupta, Ms. Lavanya Bhardwaj
For Respondents – Mr. Chetan Sharma (ASG), Dr. Vijendra Singh Mahndiyan (CGSC), Mr. Vaibhav Singh, Mr. C.P Vinod Kumar, Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat (SC, GNCTD), Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh, Mr. Amit Yadav, Mr. Ravinder Agarwal

W.P.(C) 6658/2026
For Petitioners – Mr. Parag P. Tripathi (Sr. Adv), Mr. Pragyan Pradip Sharma (Sr. Adv), Ms.
Amita Singh Kalkal, Ms. Aditi Gupta, Mr. Rachit Sharma, Mr. Akashdeep
For Respondents – Mr. P. S. Patwalia (Sr. Adv), Mr. Kirtiman Singh (Sr. Adv), Ms. Natasha Dalmia, Ms. Shambhavi Singh, Ms. Anisha Jain, Ms. Prerna Cheema, Ms. Esha Mazumdar, Mr. Abhishek Yadav, Mr. Manish Kumar, Ms. Pratima N Lakra (CGSC), Ms. Indu Uttara, Mr. G. P. Vinod Kumar (Under Secretary, MHA), Mrs Avnish Ahlawat (SC, GNCTD), Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh, Mr. Amit Yadav