Minitry Of Law And Jutice vs Bhavnesh Saini & Ors.
2020 Latest Caselaw 2265 Del

#6
       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                     Judgment Delivered On: 27.07.2020

W.P.(C) 10730/2019, CM APPL. 44379/2019 & CM APPL.
14113/2020


MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE                            .....Petitioner


                                  versus


BHAVNESH SAINI & ORS.                                  ..... Respondents

Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner          : Mr. Ravi Prakash, CGSC with Mr. Farmaan Ali,
                              Mr. Aman Malik and Mohammed Shahan Ulla,
                              Advocates
For the Respondents         : Mr. Shanker Raju and Mr. Nilansh Gaur,
                              Advocates for R-1



CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH

                                  JUDGMENT

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J. (via Video Conferencing)

1. The present writ petition has been instituted on behalf of the

Ministry of Law and Justice, the petitioner herein, essentially

aggrieved by the interim directions contained in the impugned order

dated 19.09.2019, passed by the learned Central Administrative

Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the

'CAT') in O.A. No.2381/2019 and in particular paragraph 4 thereof,

which reads as follows:-

"4. For this purpose, we intend to know whether the Search-cum-Selection Committee has undertaken the award of marks and grades on each of the factors, and if so, a copy of the same be placed before us. We grant two weeks' time to the learned counsel for the respondents for furnishing the same."

2. It is an admitted position that, during the pendency of the

present writ petition, in response to an RTI application submitted on

behalf of the respondent No.1, it has been stated by the Ministry of

Law and Justice that, "no such information is available" with the

official respondent.

3. Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned Central Government Standing

Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner further states that, there

is no requirement in law to award marks by the Selection Committee

to the candidates for the purposes of comparing comparative merits

and, thus, no such marks have been awarded and consequently

maintained.

4. Mr. Shanker Raju, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

respondents would urge that, in view of the foregoing, the present writ

petition has been rendered infructuous.

5. Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

parties, we are of the considered view that, the only course of action

that commends itself is to direct the CAT, to commence hearing of

O.A. No.2381/2019, instituted on behalf of the respondents herein,

beginning from 04.08.2020 and dispose of the same expeditiously and

preferably within a period of three months from that date, without

granting any unwarranted adjournments to the parties.

6. No further directions are called for.

7. With the above direction, the present petition is disposed of.

The pending applications also stand disposed of.

8. Needless to state that, we have not expressed any opinion on the

merits of the case and parties are at liberty to address all legal and

factual arguments, as may be available to them in law, before the

learned CAT.

9. A copy of this judgment be sent to the Principal Registrar, CAT

for necessary information and compliance. A copy of this judgment be

provided to the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties

electronically and be also uploaded on the website of this Court

forthwith.

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL (JUDGE)

TALWANT SINGH (JUDGE)

JULY 27, 2020 dn/as