Delhi High Court
Ankit Yadav And Ors. vs Union Of India And Anr. on 17 August, 2022
$~56
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 17.08.2022
+ W.P.(C) 11934/2022 & CM APPL. Nos. 35658/2022,
35659/2022 & 35660/2022
ANKIT YADAV AND ORS. ..... Petitioners
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. .....Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners : Mr. Shrikant Prasad, Advocate.
For the Respondents : Mr. Vineet Dhanda, CGSC with Mr.
Vedansh Anand, GP for R-1 and R-2.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. Petitioners impugn order dated 29.07.2022, whereby the
Original Application filed by the petitioners has been rejected by the
Tribunal.
2. The petitioners had filed the Original Application seeking a
direction to the respondents to give due weightage to the
Apprenticeship Certificate of the petitioners.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though the
petitioners had completed one year training in the year 2020, the
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VINOD KUMAR
Signing Date:20.08.2022
15:00:43
certificates were issued in the year 2022. He submits that no
examination has been held in the year 2022 and as such the
Apprenticeship Certificate be considered by the respondents.
4. This is disputed by learned counsel for the respondents, who
submits that the advertisement for the subject vacancies was issued on
23.02.2019 and the advertisement stipulated that the last date of
registration was 12.04.2019, which would be treated as the cut-off
date for completion of Apprenticeship. He submits that all candidates,
who had completed their Apprenticeship training as on the last date
i.e., 12.04.2019 were eligible for consideration even though, the
Apprenticeship Certificate had not been issued or was issued later. He
submits that since petitioners admittedly had not completed the
Apprenticeship training as on the cut-off date i.e., 12.04.2019,
petitioners are not eligible to be considered.
5. It is an admitted position that the only notification that has been
issued is the subject notification dated 23.02.2019, which stipulated
the cut-off date as 12.04.2019, before which the candidates were
supposed to have completed the Apprenticeship training. Admittedly,
the petitioners had not completed the Apprenticeship training as on the
cut-off date of 12.04.2019 and, consequently, are not eligible for being
considered pursuant to the said advertisement.
6. Accordingly, we find no merit in the petition. The petition is
consequently dismissed.
7. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
since no examination has been held for over three years and there
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VINOD KUMAR
Signing Date:20.08.2022
15:00:43
would still be vacancies left after the vacancies are filled up pursuant
to the subject advertisement, the petitioners have already given a
representation to the respondents to consider the petitioners for the
unfilled vacancies or to hold fresh examination for the unfilled
vacancies for which the petitioners, if eligible, be permitted to be
considered.
8. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that without
prejudice, respondents shall consider the representation of the
petitioners and decide the same in accordance with law.
9. In view of the above, it is directed that the respondents shall
consider the representation of the petitioners in accordance with law,
preferably within a period of four weeks from today. The
consideration would be without prejudice to the rights and contentions
of the parties and all rights and contentions are reserved.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J
AUGUST 17, 2022
nd
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VINOD KUMAR
Signing Date:20.08.2022
15:00:43
