Vikas & Ors vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 7261 Del

$~18.
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+     W.P.(C) 7382/2017 and CM APPL. 30476/2017, 30479/2017
      VIKAS & ORS                                   ..... Petitioners
                       Through: Mr. Manoj Gorkela, Dr. Alok and
                       Mr. Rajnish Singh, Advocates

                          versus

       GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS                ..... Respondents
                     Through: Mr. Sumit Batra, Advocate for R-1 to
                     R-3/GNCTD.
                     Mr. M.K. Bhardwaj, Advocate for R-4 to R-6.
       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
       HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI
                     ORDER

% 15.12.2017

1. This petition has been filed by four petitioners praying inter alia for issuing directions to the respondent No.3/DSSSB to conduct a re- examination in respect of the posts of Grade-II (DASS).

2. Counsel for the petitioners states that all the four petitioners had participated in the subject examination conducted by the respondent No.3/DSSSB on 22.08.2015 and were unsuccessful therein. Subsequently, on 15.03.2016, the entire selection process was cancelled by the DSSSB.

3. We are of the view that the petitioners do not have any locus standi to file the present petition when they were not even successful in clearing the subject examination and the entire process was subsequently scrapped by the respondent No.3/DSSSB. It is also noteworthy that when the respondent No.3/DSSSB had cancelled the examination, some of the successful candidates had challenged said action before the Central Administrative

Tribunal in O.A. No.3941/2015, which was disposed of vide judgment dated 01.02.2017. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the respondent No.3/DSSSB has filed a writ petition in this Court, registered as W.P.(C) 5756/2017, that is listed at item no.17 in today's cause list.

4. In such circumstances, we do not see any reason to permit the petitioners to file the present petition and thereby, indirectly seek the intervention of the court in respect of the order dated 01.02.2017 passed by the Tribunal, when they were not even parties to the said proceedings.

5. The present petition is accordingly dismissed as not maintainable, alongwith the pending applications.

HIMA KOHLI, J

REKHA PALLI, J DECEMBER 15, 2017 rkb/ap