Akhilesh Kumar v. Union Of India & ANR
i 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.
$~3&4 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(01768/2nifi RAVISH CHANDRA petitioner Through:
Mr. B.C. Bhatt, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.
Respondents Through: Ms. Abha Malhotra, Mr. Gaurang Bindra & Mr. Harish Garg, Advocates + W.P.(C) 1825/201 AKHILESH KUMAR pe,itio„er Through:
Mr. B.C. Bhatt, Advocate
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.
Respondents Through. Ms. Abha Malhotra, Mr. Gaurang Bindra & Mr. Harish Garg, Advocates
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
23.03.2016 1.
The present petitions have been filed by the petitioners praying inter alia that the respondent No.l-Assam Rifles, East Khast Hills, W.P.(C) 1768/2016 p t ^
Shilong, Mehgalaya and the respondent No.2- Staff Selection Commission, be directed to produce the relevant records pertaining to the written, oral, physical and medical tests of all the candidates who have participated in the selection process for the post of Constable (GD) in CAPFS and Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles, 2012 and further for direction to the respondent No.2 to issue a letter of selection in their favour.
2.
Since the relief claimed by the petitioners in the captioned petitions is similar, therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, these petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
3.
Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had qualified the written, oral, physical and medical tests and despite the same, their names do not figure in the list of selected candidates. 4.
As per the records, the Review Medical Board in respect of both the petitioners was conducted in May, 2013, whereas these petitions were filed in December, 2015, and had remained under objections till March, 2016. There is no explanation worth the name offered by the petitioners to explain the delay of almost 254 years in approaching the Court for relief in respect of the selection process that had been initiated in the year 201 f.
5.
Counsel for the respondents states on instructions that contraiy to the averments made in the petitions that the petitioners had cleared the Review Medical Board, neither of them had cleared the medical test which would be apparent from a perusal of the computed list of W.P.(C) 1768/2016 . pa„e2of^
candidates, who were found fit in the Review Medical Board Examination. A copy of the computed list received by the counsel for the respondents from the Commandant (Recruitment), Border Security Force and addressed to the respondent No.2 is handed over and a copy thereof, has been furnished to the counsel for the petitioner. 6.
On a perusal of the said document and the computed list of candidates who were found fit in the Review Medical Board conducted by the respondents, it transpires that the name of neither of the petitioners features in the said list. The petitioners having failed to clear the Review Medical Board, they are not entitled for being selected to the post of Constable (GD).
7.
In view of the aforesaid position, both the petitions are dismissed V.
as being devoid of merits.
HIMA KOHLI, J SUNIL GAUR, J MARCH 23, 2016 r W,P.(C) 1768/2016