Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
JYOTI SINGH, J.
Abhishek Sharma - Appellant
Versus
Airports Authority of India & Others - Respondent
W.P.(C). No. 5516 of 2020 & CM. No. 19867 of 2020 (for interim direction)
Decided On : 12-01-2021
Bias - Recruitment Process - [Clause 6 of the Advertisement, Circular No. 08 of 2017] - The judgment discusses the bias alleged by the petitioner against a committee member and the irregularities in the selection process. The court examines the events of the recruitment process, the allegations of bias, and the scoring in the Physical Endurance Test. It concludes that there was no bias in the committee and the petitioner's claims are unsubstantiated.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenges the rejection of his representations and seeks a direction to appear before an independent Board/Committee for a fresh Physical Endurance Test (PET) and appointment as Junior Assistant (Fire Service). The petitioner alleges bias in the selection process, irregularities in the PET, and improper scoring in the Pole Climbing Test.
Finding of the Court:
The court finds that there was no bias in the committee and the petitioner's claims of irregularities and bias are unsubstantiated. It concludes that the petitioner's scoring in the PET was based on his actual performance and there was no manipulation or bias in the scoring. The court dismisses the writ petition.
Issues: Alleged bias of a committee member, irregularities in the selection process, improper scoring in the Pole Climbing Test.
Ratio Decidendi: The court rules that the petitioner's claims of bias and irregularities are unsubstantiated. It emphasizes that the scoring in the PET was based on the petitioner's actual performance, as evidenced by video recordings, and there was no manipulation or bias in the scoring.
Final Decision: The court dismisses the writ petition, finding no merit in the petitioner's claims of bias and irregularities in the selection process.
JUDGMENT :
1. Petitioner assails the order dated 19.05.2020 whereby his representations dated 21.03.2020, 30.03.2020 and 02.04.2020 were rejected by the Respondents and also seeks a direction to allow the Petitioner to appear before an independent Board/Committee set up by the Respondents to conduct a fresh Physical Endurance Test (hereinafter referred to as “PET’) and if found fit appoint him as Junior Assistant (Fire Service) against the unfilled vacancies in the Northern Region with all consequential benefits.
2. The narrative of facts as set out in the petition is that on being eligible as per the eligibility criteria, the Petitioner applied against an Advertisement issued by the Respondents on 20.09.2017 for recruitment to 84 posts of Junior Assistant (Fire Service) NE-4 level at various Airports in the Northern Region. Applications were invited from eligible candidates who were domicile of Delhi, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh. Petitioner is a domicile of Rajasthan and pursuant to application, an admit card was issued for written examination scheduled on 10.12.2017, which the Petitioner cleared successfully. Petitioner was thereafter called for Medical Assessment, Driving Test and PET and the Petitioner appeared in the various tests, held on 22.03.2018.
3. According to the provisions of Clause 6 of the Advertisement, Petitioner was required to meet certain physical standards, to be declared ‘Fit’. One of the criteria required to be met was ‘Height’ (for male candidates) being not less than 167 cms. Petitioner was however declared ‘Unfit’ as his height was measured and recorded as 166 cms and thus the Petitioner was disqualified to undertake the remaining tests. Knowing that the height of the Petitioner was more than 167 cms, he approached the Rajasthan State Hospital on 23.03.2018 and after examining him, the Doctor certified the height to be 168.9 cms. A second opinion was also taken from another Hospital at Jaipur which affirmed the measurement in the said certificate.
4. Vide email dated 24.03.2018, Petitioner informed the Respondents of the height assessment made by the Doctors in the two Hospitals, followed by a reminder dated 15.05.2018 and requested the Respondents to call him for a review examination. On 21.05.2018, Respondents issued a Notification of provisional list of selected candidates, which led to the Petitioner approaching this Court by filing a writ petition being W.P.(C) 5945/2018, for quashing the Select List, without considering the case of the Petitioner based on the re-assessment of his height.
5. This Court vide order dated 29.05.2018 disposed of the petition by directing Medical Superintendent of RML Hospital to constitute a Medical Board for measuring the height of the Petitioner, within two weeks of the receipt of the copy of the order and observed that the parties shall abide by outcome of the Medical Board. It was directed that if the report of the Board was found favourable to the Petitioner, then there being a vacancy in the unreserved category, further process for appointment of the Petitioner would be initiated expeditiously.
6. In compliance of the judgment, a Medical Board was constituted and Petitioner was examined. Height was recorded as 167.2 cms and as the Petitioner qualified the requisite parameter, Respondents vide order dated 30.10.2018, called the Petitioner for the next phase of selection process, scheduled to be held on 14.06.2020. Petitioner was directed to appear in the PET involving the following events:
ii. Rope Climbing – 20 marks would be awarded if complete 8 meters is covered and a minimum of 8 marks even if fails to perform.
iii. Pole Climbing – 20 marks on complete height climbing which is of 8 m
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
