Delhi High Court
Manoj Kumar vs Union Of India And Anr on 5 November, 2012
Author: Pradeep Nandrajog
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: November 05, 2012
+ W.P.(C) 6966/2012
MANOJ KUMAR ..... Petitioner
Represented by: Mr.Anil Singal, Advocate.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR ..... Respondent
Represented by: Mr.Amrit Pal Singh, Advocate and
Ms.Gurjinder Kaur, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. (Oral)
1. Since the facts stated in the writ petition are not disputed, with
consent of learned counsel for the parties the writ petition is being disposed
of today itself.
2. Employed as a Constable (GD) in CRPF the petitioner took the
CPO Examination - 2009 held by Staff Selection Commission for the post
of Sub-Inspector. The results were declared on July 20, 2010. In spite of
having qualified at the written examination as also the interview and
notwithstanding petitioner having obtained marks above the cut-off point, he
was surprised to note that his name was not included in the select list. The
reason was (probably) a complaint received by the Staff Selection
Commission that at the written examination, with respect to some
candidates, which included the petitioner, there was impersonation. The
petitioner was called upon in October, 2011 to give his specimen hand
writing and signatures, which were forwarded, along with the answer sheet
of the petitioner, to the Government Examiner of Questioned Documents at
Shimla on or around November, 2011, for opinion, and till date, the Staff
Selection Commission or the Ministry of Home Affairs has not bothered to
ensure that the Government Examiner of Questioned Documents sends an
opinion on the reference made.
3. On September 03, 2012 deciding W.P.(C) No.5454/2012 Aman
Kumar Vs. UOI & Anr. wherein similar issue had been raised, we had
disposed of the writ petition directing the respondents to ensure that the
opinion sought from the Government Examiner of Questioned Documents at
Shimla is positively obtained within 3 weeks from that day and the
petitioner be issued a letter of appointment if the opinion is in favour of the
petitioner. If the opinion is against the petitioner, the process of law with
respect to the petitioner being granted an opportunity of fair hearing before
the final decision is taken be resorted to. In either case, the decision taken to
be conveyed to the petitioner within 4 weeks from the date of the decision.
The reason was that more than one and half year had elapsed since matter
was referred for opinion to the Government Examiner of Questioned
Documents.
4. Instant writ petition also stands disposed of directing the
respondents to ensure that the opinion sought from the Government
Examiner of Questioned Documents at Shimla is positively obtained within
4 weeks from today and the petitioner be issued a letter of appointment if the
opinion is in favour of the petitioner. If the opinion is against the petitioner,
the process of law with respect to the petitioner being granted an opportunity
of fair hearing before the final decision is taken be resorted to. In any case,
the decision would be conveyed to the petitioner either way within 5 weeks
from today.
5. No costs.
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.
MANMOHAN SINGH, J.
NOVEMBER 05, 2012 /dk/
