Md. Abdul Hamid v. UOI And ORS

Signed By:RAM DATT Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing.

$~2 to 4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 268/2016 MD. ABDUL HAMID Petitioner Through:

Mr. S.K. Divakar, Advocate versus UOI AND ORS Respondents Through:

Mr. K.K. Jha and Mr. Reshesh Mani Tripathi, Advocates for respondent-UOI + W.P.(C) 278/2016 WASIMUDDIN Petitioner Through:

Mr. S.K. Divakar, Advocate .versus UOI AND ORS Respondents Through:

Mr. K.K. Jha and Mr. Reshesh Mani Tripathi, Advocates for respondent-UOI + W.P.(C) 305/2016 PRADEEP KUMAR Petitioner Through:

Mr. S.K. Divakar, Advocate versus UOI AND ORS Respondents Through:

Mr. K.K. Jha and Mr. Reshesh Mani Tripathi, Advocates for respondent-UOI a

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

>

ORDER

o/o 20.01.2016 *1"

-s:-"

- .

1.

The present three petitions have been filed by the petitioners praying inter alia for issuing directions to the respondents No.2 and 3-Staff Selection Commission to consider their candidature to the post of Constables with the BSF/CISF/CRPF/SSB, in terms of the newspaper advertisement dated 5*^^ June, 2011. 2.

It is the case of all the petitioners that at the time of filing an V.

application with the respondents, they had erroneously not specified that they are residents of a Naxal area in the State of Uttar Pradesh.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that having failed to state so, though the petitioners have secured more marks than the last selected candidates, the respondents did not consider their applications and did not appoint them. 3.

It has been enquired fronh learned counsel for the petitioners as to whether before approaching this Court, each of the petitioners have submitted substantive representations to the Vrespondents No.2 and 3 for consideration.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that he may be granted leave to withdraw the present petitions while reserving the right of the petitioners to submit substantive representations to the respondents No.2 and 3 and in the event their said representation

is turned down by the respondents No.2 and 3, liberty be granted to the petitioners to seek their remedies in accordance with law.

5.

While disposing of the present petitions, liberty is granted to the petitioners to approach respondents No.2 and 3 by submitting representations within one week.

Upon receiving the said representations;

respondents No.2 and 3 shall consider the same in the light of the order dated 14^^ July, 2014 passed in a batch of matter, lead matter being W.P.(C).5663/2013 entitled Deepak Kumar Singh and Ors: v. Union of India and Ors. and pass a speaking order.

Thereafter, the decision taken by them shall be communicated in writing to the petitioners within four weeks from the date of receipt of the said representations. If the grievance of petitioners still subsists, they shall be entitled to seek their remedy in accordance with law.

6.

The petitions are disposed of.

V HIMA KOHLI, J SUNIL GAUR, J JANUARY 20, 2016 s