Delhi High Court
Neha Verma vs Union Public Service Commission ... on 13 October, 2022
Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/004314
$~35
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 13.10.2022
+ W.P (C) 12775/2022 & CM APPL. 38895-97/2022
NEHA VERMA ..... Petitioner
versus
UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND ORS.....
Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Naresh Kaushik and Mr. Shubham Dwivedi, Mr. Anand
Singh and Mr. Manoj Joshi, Advocates for UPSC/R-1.
Ms. Pratima N.Lakra, CGSC with Ms. Vrinda Baheti,
Advocates for R-3.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. Petitioner impugns order dated 22.08.2022 passed by the
Tribunal whereby the original application filed by the petitioner had
been rejected.
2. Petitioner had applied for the post of Specialist Grade III
Assistant Professor (ENT) Ministry of Health and Family Welfare
under the OBC category.
3. On 06.09.2022 learned counsel for the petitioner had contended
Signature Not Verified
Digital Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:17.10.2022 13:22:02
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/004314
that petitioner had been ousted from consideration solely on the
ground that petitioner did not have the requisite teaching experience of
three years. The contention of the petitioner was that petitioner
possessed the requisite teaching experience and had been performing
additional duties of teaching since the year 2015.
4. On 06.09.2022 this Court had noticed that the interview process
was already on and in those circumstances, without prejudice to the
rights and contentions of the parties it was directed that petitioner be
permitted to participate in the interview process and the result of the
petitioner be produced in a sealed cover.
5. Said direction was passed for the purpose of ascertaining as to
whether petitioner would qualify or not for the said posts irrespective
of the eligibility criterion.
6. It is informed that there is only one OBC seat. The result has
been produced in a sealed cover. It is noticed that there is one
candidate in the OBC category who has scored higher than the
petitioner and has thus been recommended.
7. In view of the fact that petitioner is not the candidate who is
selected in the interview having scored marks lesser than the one who
has been selected, we are of the view that the issue with regard to
eligibility of the petitioner need not be examined any further in these
proceedings.
Signature Not Verified
Digital Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:17.10.2022 13:22:02
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/004314
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in case the
recommended candidate does not join, petitioner would have an
opportunity to be considered in accordance with rules.
9. In view of the fact that petitioner has not been recommended
having scored lesser marks than the recommended candidate, we
dispose of this petition, however, with liberty to the petitioner to seek
revival of the petition in case the candidate recommended does not
join within the stipulated period in accordance with the rules. The
question of eligibility of the petitioner is accordingly left open.
10. The original result that has been produced in a sealed cover is
once again sealed under the signatures of Court Master and handed
over to the counsel for the respondent.
11. Petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms. All rights
and contentions of the parties are reserved.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J.
OCTOBER 13, 2022/rk
Signature Not Verified
Digital Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:17.10.2022 13:22:02
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
