Back
V. KAMESWAR RAO, ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
Patkar Sameer Narayan – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
V. Kameswar Rao (Oral)
CM APPL. 44107/2023
1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 11338/2023, CM APPL. 44106/2023
3. The challenge in this writ petition is to an order dated August 08, 2023 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench (`Tribunal' for short), in O.A. 2302/2023, whereby the Tribunal, while considering the prayer of the petitioners for interim relief, has rejected the same.
4. We have heard Mr. Ankur Chhibber, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr. Chetan Sharma, learned ASG appearing for respondent No. 1 and Mr. Naresh Kaushik, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2. The issue, which arises for consideration in this writ petition, is with regard to the examination to be conducted by UPSC for promotions to the post of Section Officer (in the CSS Cadre) from the post of Assistant Section Officer under LDCE quota.
5. As per the schedule notified by UPSC, the examination for the vacancy years 2019-20 has to be held on August 26 and 27, 2023 and for the vacancy years 2021-22 on September 09 and 10, 2023 respectively.
6. The submission of Mr. Sharma and Mr. Kaushik i
The court's decision was based on the principle that the petitioners should appear in the examination as scheduled without prejudice to their rights and contentions before the Tribunal.
If interim direction is not issued in matter, pending adjudication of petitioner’s cause, O.A. preferred by him will be rendered infructuous.
The court emphasized the necessity of interim relief in administrative matters to protect the rights of applicants pending adjudication.
The court highlighted the necessity for the Tribunal to provide adequate reasoning when issuing interim orders and the importance of defining the crucial date based on recruitment rules.
The importance of considering the prima facie case, balance of convenience, and potential harm in granting interim relief, and the need for a reasoned interim order.
Judicial review limits interim relief before a successful original application; emphasis placed on the need for expeditious handling of pending cases.
The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of the seniority list and the implications of promotions made pursuant to LDCE for the year 2021-22, highlighting the importance of adhering ....
The fixing of examination schedules is the sole domain of the employer or recruiting agency, and candidates cannot claim postponement due to clashing dates with other exams.
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.
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
