Delhi High Court
Tanveer Alam vs Government Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 21 November, 2022
Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005091
$~33
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 21.11.2022
+ W.P.(C) 15601/2022
TANVEER ALAM ..... Petitioner
versus
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. B. Sengupta and Mr. R.S. Kaushik,
Advocates.
For the Respondent : Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, SC for GNCTD with Mr.
Nitesh Kumar Singh, Ms. Laavanya Kaushik
and Ms. Aliza Alam, Advocate for R-1.
Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Advocate for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
CM APPL. 48521/2022 (for exemption)
Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 15601/2022
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VINOD KUMAR
Signing Date:24.11.2022 W.P.(C) 15601/2022 1
16:15:47
Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005091
1. Petitioner impugns order dated 29.09.2022, whereby the
Miscellaneous Application ('MA') filed by the petitioner, has been
rejected.
2. Petitioner had filed the subject Original Application ('OA')
impugning the rejection of his candidature on the alleged ground of being
overage.
3. Petitioner had applied for consideration for the post of Principal in
the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi ('GNCTD')
schools.
4. Petitioner also sought benefit of the provision for age relaxation
available for Central/ Union Territory Government Servants up to five
years.
5. The application form of the petitioner was rejected on the ground of
being overage. It is noticed from the application form that in the column
for age relaxation, petitioner has mentioned GNCTD whereas, in the
column for general experience, he has mentioned Andaman & Nicobar
Administration.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the discrepancy has
occurred on account of a human error.
7. We notice that the Tribunal had declined to grant interim relief to
the petitioner seeking permission to participate in the written examination,
which was scheduled for 17.07.2022 and had listed the matter on
11.07.2022 then on 13.07.2022, when it was adjourned to 15.07.2022.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VINOD KUMAR
Signing Date:24.11.2022 W.P.(C) 15601/2022 2
16:15:47
Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005091
8. The petitioner had approached this Court in W.P.(C) 10682/2022 on
the premise that the examination was scheduled for 17.07.2022 and any
further delay by the Tribunal would prejudice him. Said petition was
disposed of on 15.07.2022 noticing that the OA was listed before the
Tribunal on 15.07.2022 itself and as such, there was no ground made out
for interfering with the hearing of the proceedings before the Tribunal.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 15.07.2022
instead of the interim relief being considered, the Tribunal adjourned the
matter sine die, thereby the petitioner was deprived of an opportunity to
participate in the written examination.
10. Subject Miscellaneous Application was filed by the petitioner
thereafter, seeking a direction to the respondents to hold a special
examination for the petitioner, which has been declined.
11. We are of the view that at an ad-interim stage, a direction cannot be
issued to the UPSC to hold a special examination for the petitioner. It is
only after the petitioner is able to succeed in the OA that consequential
relief can be granted to the petitioner. Since petitioner's OA is still
pending before the Tribunal, no such direction can be issued to the UPSC
to hold a special examination. Accordingly, we find no infirmity in the
order of the Tribunal declining the interim relief to the petitioner, at this
stage.
12. However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case
and also the fact that despite this Court declining to interfere in the earlier
petition, on the ground that the petition was listed before the Tribunal on
that very date and the Tribunal having adjourned the matter, we are of the
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VINOD KUMAR
Signing Date:24.11.2022 W.P.(C) 15601/2022 3
16:15:47
Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005091
view that direction be issued to the Tribunal to expedite the proceedings
and to dispose of the OA finally on merits expeditiously.
13. It is informed by Mr. Kaushik, learned counsel appearing for UPSC
that after the result of the written examination, an interview has to be
conducted and as on date, there is no date fixed for holding the interview.
He submits that the process is likely to take about four weeks.
14. In view of the above, we dispose of this petition with a request to
the Tribunal to expedite the proceedings and endeavor to conclude and
finally dispose of the OA within a period of four weeks from today.
15. Petitioner shall file rejoinder to the reply filed by the respondents in
the record of the Tribunal within five days from today.
16. Parties shall appear before the Tribunal for directions on
28.11.2022.
17. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J
NOVEMBER 21, 2022/nd
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VINOD KUMAR
Signing Date:24.11.2022 W.P.(C) 15601/2022 4
16:15:47
