Delhi High Court
Nitish Malik vs Union Public Service Commission & ... on 10 March, 2022
$~2 & 4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: March 10, 2022
+ W.P.(C) 2299/2022 & CM APPLN. 6606-07/2022
VIKRANT SEHRAWAT ...... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ankur Chibber, Advocate
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Ajay Digpaul, CGSC & Mr.
Kamal R. Digpaul, Advocate with
Mr. Kailash Chandra Bhatt, Asst.
Commandant (Office)
+ W.P.(C) 3626/2022 & CM APPLN. 10745/2022
NITISH MALIK ...... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sanchar Anand, Advocate
Versus
UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ANR. .....
Respondents
Through: Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Advocate &
Mr. Anand Singh for respondent
No.1/UPSC
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
J U D G M E N T (oral)
1. By way of the above captioned writ petitions bearing W.P. (C) Nos.
2299/2022 and 3626/2022, the petitioners seek a direction to the
respondents to call them for the Physical Standard Test (PST);
Physical Efficiency Test (PET) and the Medical Standard Test (MST)
under the relevant guidelines of the Central Armed Police Forces
(Assistant Commandant) Examination, 2021; and, if found fit, to call
them for the next stage of the selection process.
2. Since the facts and issues raised, and the prayers sought, in both the
writ petitions are very similar, these petitions have been heard
together and are being disposed-of by this common judgment.
3. The case of the petitioners is that pursuant to Notice dated 15.04.2021
issued by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), the
petitioners had applied for the post of Assistant Commandant in the
Central Armed Police Forces. Both the petitioners had appeared in the
written examination held on 08.08.2021; the results whereof were
declared on 13.10.2021 by the UPSC vidé two different Press Notes;
and both petitioners were declared successful in the examination.
According to the petitioners, the first Press Note contained the roll
numbers of all the provisionally selected candidates who had qualified
for PST, PET and MST; and the second Press Note also contained the
results along with instructions regarding online submission of the
Detailed Application Form (DAF) by the candidates.
4. The grievance of the petitioners is that though the PST, PET and MST
were scheduled and conducted by the respondents from 22.12.2021 to
31.12.2021; however, the petitioners contend that they did not receive
any intimation nor the admit cards for the same; and were therefore
unable to appear in these tests.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners submit that the
primary responsibility of intimating provisionally selected candidates
about the schedule of these physical/medical tests was that of the
nodal authority nominated by the respondents i.e. the ITBP; but no
intimation was given to the petitioners.
6. To the contrary, learned Central Government Standing Counsel
appearing on behalf of the respondents have refuted the claim made
on behalf of petitioners, instead drawing attention of this court to
Entry No.11 dated 09.12.2021 appearing on the portal of the
respondents i.e.recruitment.itbpolice.nic.in highlighting that "PST
PET AND MST OF CAPFS ACS EXAMINATION 2021 HAS
BEEN SCHEDULED FROM 22-12-2021 ONWARDS
CANDIDATES MAY DOWNLOAD THEIR ADMIT CARD FROM
MENTIONED LINK IN PDF FILE". Attention of this court has also
been drawn to e-mails sent to the petitioners containing the link to the
admit card and intimating the schedule of the tests, supported by the
certificates issued by the National Informatics Centre and M/s
CISCO, evidencing that the e-mails in question were duly delivered to
the petitioners. It is thereby contended that it is the petitioners who
have, for their own fault, failed to appear in the aforesaid tests.
7. It is further submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of
respondents that Press Note dated 13.10.2021 issued by them also
stated that if any candidate does not receive any intimation from the
nodal authority in respect of Physical Standards Tests/Physical
Efficiency Test and Medical Standards Test, "he/she may contact the
HQ, DG, Indo Tibetan Border Police on Telephone No. 011-
24369482/011-24369483 & e-mail ID [email protected] and
U.P.S.C.". It is submitted that despite this, the petitioners - Vikrant
Sehrawat and Nitish Malik approached the respondents only on
07.01.2022 and 20.01.2022 respectively, whereas the PST, PET and
MST were conducted by the respondents between 22.12.2021 and
31.12.2021.
8. Learned counsel for respondents, on instructions, have also informed
this court that the results for the PST, PET and MST have already
been sent to the UPSC; and further that, around 230 candidates did
not appear in the physical/medical exams; and that they have in fact
received around 32 representations as mentioned in the Press Note in
this behalf. The respondents' submission is that if these petitions are
allowed, it would open thePandora's box for them.
9. We have heard learned counsel representing both sides and have
carefully considered the matter.
10. In view of the material produced before this court by the respondents,
we reject the contention of petitioners that they had not received any
communication from the respondents regarding the schedule and dates
for the PST/PET/MST or that the petitioners had not received their
admit cards for the said tests. Moreover, when information in that
regard was in any case available on the official portal of respondents,
it was the petitioners' duty to be vigilant and to check the portal for
such information in a timely manner; failing which, they could even
have contacted the respondents on the phone numbers, e-mail IDs etc.
available on the portal. This, the petitioners evidently did not do. Now
that the results for PST, PET and MST have already been sent to the
UPSC for continuing further with the selection process, we find no
ground to allow these petitions.
11. The petitions and pending applications are accordingly dismissed.
(SURESH KUMAR KAIT)
JUDGE
(ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI)
JUDGE
MARCH 10, 2022
r
