High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/1089/2019

Kanti Gari v. Ministry Of Civil Aviation And ANR.

2019-03-29Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Suresh Kumar Kait2 pages

$~4 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 1089/2019 KANTI GARI ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sumit Packhande with Ms. Priya Sharma and Mr. Nagesh, Advs.

versus MINISTRY OF CIVIL AVIATION AND ANR.

..... Respondents Through Mr. Vikas Mahajan, CGSC, Mr.

Aakash Varma, Advocate, Mr.

Deepak Goyal with Ms. Rubhali Nandi, Advs. for UOI with Mr. Syed Husain Adil Taqui, G.P. for UOI Mr. Lalit Bhasin with Ms. Ratna Dhingra, Ms. Chandni Sadana and Mr. Ajay Pratap Singh, Advs. for R-2

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

O R D E R

% 29.03.2019 Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks direction thereby declaring the footnotes of the advertisement published by respondent no.2 regarding the requirement of Experienced and Trainee Cabin Crew 2017 ultra vires to Articles 14, 16 & 19 of the Constitution of India. He further seeks direction thereby to set aside the recruitment process for the post of Cabin Crew through advertisement of 2017 and consequently, direct the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner afresh. Respondent no.2 issued advertisement for the post of Experienced and Trainee Cabin Crew (on Fixed Term Engagement) in the year 2017 and the

aforesaid post of Cabin Crew was only for female candidates. The petitioner applied for the above post and thereafter his documents were verified and was called for interview. The petitioner also successfully qualified the medical round.

However, the candidature of the petitioner was not considered.

In the advertisement, it was specifically mentioned that the candidature of Cabin Crew working with any of the subsidiaries companies of Air India Ltd. will not be considered.

Admittedly, the petitioner is working with Air India Express and the process in question is for the Cabin Crew in Air India. Despite, she applied for the same. The petitioner did not challenge the said condition, when the respondent Air India advertised for the post in question. Since the petitioner is working with Air India Express, which is a subsidiary company of Air India, and the Air India has not selected any of the Cabin Crew, who are working in the subsidiary companies, I, therefore, find no merit to entertain the present petition. The same is, accordingly, dismissed.

SURESH KUMAR KAIT, J MARCH 29, 2019 ms