Back
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, SANJEEV NARULA
Anuj Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
Judgment
Sanjeev Narula, J. (Oral). - CM APPL. 1385/2021 (for exemption)
1. Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.
2. The application is disposed of.
LPA 21/2021 & CM APPL. Nos. 1383/2021 (for ad-interim reliefs), 1384/2021 (for directions to Respondent No. 2 - UPSC)
3. The present Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 10 of Letters Patent is directed against the final order and judgment dated 20th November, 2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 8510 of 2020. By way of the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the Petitioner (being the Appellant herein) praying for a writ of Certiorari seeking inter alia the quashing of the examination of the National Defence Academy & Naval Academy Examination (II), 2020 held on 6th September, 2020 by the Respondent No. 2.
4. On 16th June, 2020, Respondent No. 2 issued notice No. 08/2020-NDA-II for the abovesaid examination. Pursuant thereto, the Appellant applied, and was allocated a roll number for appearing in the examination, to be held at the test centre at Bhopal Institute of Technology, Bhojpur Road, Bhopal. The grievance of the Appellant is that on the date of examination there were i
Courts should refrain from intervening in factual disputes in writ petitions and should only annul/cancel competitive exams with sufficient evidence of misconduct or negligence.
In case of doubt, the benefit should go to the Examination Authority rather than to the candidates.
The court upheld the Commission’s authority to conduct a second written examination to rectify previous evaluation errors, affirming the necessity for fair recruitment practices.
The decision to cancel the examination was based on material available, logical, legal, rational, procedurally proper, proportional, reasonable, and fair, aiming to maintain the purity of public exam....
Minor technical irregularities in recruitment exams, promptly rectified without systemic fraud or inability to segregate tainted/untainted candidates, do not vitiate entire selection process.
The petitioner cannot challenge the selection process at a later stage.
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
