SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Del) 326

H.R.MALHOTRA, MUKUL MUDGAL
VIKAS KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
UOI – Respondent


MUKUL MUDGAL J.

( 1 ) RULE DB. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing.

( 2 ) PURSUANT to an advertisement published in June, 2004, the petitioners filled up their forms for recruitment of 1435 vacancies to the post of constables in BSF from the States of Delhi, UP and Uttaranchal. The petitioners cleared the written test, interview, physical test and the medical examination and were given reporting letters on the basis of their selection. It appears that thereafter the petitioners were told not to continue their stay in the BSF unit where they had reported because of the apparent view taken by the respondents that the petitioners did not fulfill the conditions as stipulated in the reporting letters. The only cause why the petitioners are said to be not qualified according to the respondents is that they do not have certificate of hill area which was given in the letters selecting the petitioners, which certificate was a sine qua non of the selection of the petitioners.

( 3 ) THE main plea of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners exclusion from the unit which prevented them from deriving the









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top