Tayde Kailas Yuvraj vs Union Of India Ors & Ors.
2023 Latest Caselaw 3320 Del

                          Neutral Citation Number 2023:DHC:5660-DB


                          $~28

                          *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                          %                                       Judgment delivered on: 07.08.2023

                                   W.P.(C) 9454/2023 & CM APPL. 36071-36072/2023


                          +      W.P.(C) 9454/2023

                                 TAYDE KAILAS YUVRAJ                                 ..... Petitioner

                                                                  versus

                                 UNION OF INDIA ORS & ORS.                           ..... Respondents

                          Advocates who appeared in this case:

                          For the Appellant:                 Mr. R.K. Ojha, Advocate.

                          For the Respondent:                Mr. Rishabh Sahu, Sr. Panel Counsel with
                                                             Mr. Jitendra Kumar Tripathi, GP and Mr.
                                                             Sameer Sharma, Advocate.



                          CORAM:-
                          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
                          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

                                                     JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner had impugned the rejection of his candidature on the ground that the biometric of the petitioner that was captured at stage-I i.e. written examination did not match the biometric of the petitioner in stage-II.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed

Signing Date:11.08.2023 13:28:03 Neutral Citation Number 2023:DHC:5660-DB

2. Written examination was conducted at Shimla for stage-I and stage-II verification was done in Goa. It was contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the machine at Goa was not functional.

3. Accordingly, on 18.07.2023, this Court directed the Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (CDAC) to produce the biometric of the petitioner for physical verification in Court today.

4. The requisite biometric has been produced in digital form alongwith a Laptop with the pre-loaded software for verification of the biometric.

5. Despite several attempts in Court the biometric of the petitioner does not match with the biometric of the candidate captured at Stage-I.

6. Since the biometric of the petitioner has not matched between Stage-I and Stage-II and even before this Court, we find no fault with the action of the respondents in rejecting the candidature of the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, we find no merit in the petition. The petition is dismissed.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J

MANOJ JAIN, J AUGUST 07, 2023/swati

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed

Signing Date:11.08.2023 13:28:03