Delhi High Court
Amit Prakash Poonia vs Union Of India & Anr. on 21 February, 2022
$~S-46
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 3150/2022 & CM APPL.9167/2022
AMIT PRAKASH POONIA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Ajit Kakkar, Advocate.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Abhishek Singh, Advocate.
% Date of Decision: 21st February, 2022
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVING CHAWLA
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, J (Or al):
1. Present writ petition has been filed seeking directions to the
Respondents to issue call up letter to the Petitioner and grant him
appointment in the Territorial Army along with seniority. In the alternative,
the Petitioner seeks direction to the Respondents to grant appointment to the
Petitioner subject to order dated 01st September, 2021 passed in W.P.(C)
9299/2021.
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner applied in
Territorial Army pursuant to the notification issued in May, 2019. Learned
counsel further states that despite completion of petitioner's verification and
approval of his selection for commissioning in the Territorial Army, he was
not issued a Call Up Letter.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:23.02.2022
21:24:42
3. He states that the upon enquiry, the Petitioner was informed vide
letter dated 28th September, 2021 that the Petitioner had not been issued a
Call Up letter due to the order passed by this Court on 01st September, 2021
in W.P.(C) 9299/2021 according to which any new appointment has been
made subject to further orders of this Court.
4. He states that the Respondents have misinterpreted the above-
mentioned order passed by this Court. He also points out that W.P.(C)
9299/2021 had been filed by certain female candidates challenging the
selection process in the Territorial Army (TA-2019). He emphasises that the
said case has no bearing on the Petitioner's appointment since the Petitioner
herein is a male candidate and shall be appointed against the vacancies for
the male candidates.
5. He states that Petitioner's appointment had already been inordinately
delayed owing to delay in conducting verification of his documents for no
lapse on his part which has resulted in loss of seniority to the Petitioner as
his counterparts have already been duly appointed and are serving in the
Territorial Army.
6. Issue notice. Mr.Abhishek Singh, learned counsel for the respondents,
accepts notice. He prays that this Court may clarify its own order dated 1st
September, 2021.
7. Keeping in view the aforesaid, it is clarified that vide order dated 01st
September 2021 passed in W.P.(C) 9299/2021 this Court had only directed
that new appointments in the Territorial Army Commission- 2019 (TA-20
19) shall be subject to the further orders of this Court. This Court has not
granted any stay or placed an embargo on the appointments of the
candidates per se and, therefore, the decision of the Respondents to withhold
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:23.02.2022
21:24:42
the Petitioner's appointment by solely relying on the order dated 01st
September 2021, passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 9299/2021 is untenable in
law. Consequently, the respondents are directed to grant appointment, if any,
to the petitioner subject to the order dated 1st September, 2021 in WP(C)
9299/2021. With the aforesaid clarification and direction, the present writ
petition and application are disposed of.
MANMOHAN, J
NAVIN CHAWLA, J
FEBRUARY 21, 2022
TS
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:23.02.2022
21:24:42
