Syed Ahmar Ali Hashmi vs Union Public Service Commission

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

DELHI HIGH COURT
RAJIV SHAKDHER, TALWANT SINGH
Syed Ahmar Ali Hashmi – Appellant
Versus
Union Public Service Commission – Respondent

Table of Content
1. details of the petitioner's employment and age relaxation policy. (Para 1 , 2)
2. petitioner’s appeal to central administrative tribunal and proceedings. (Para 3 , 4)
3. key provisions of the office memorandum regarding age relaxation. (Para 6 , 7)
4. conditions for age relaxation eligibility outlined. (Para 8)
5. respondents' objections to the applicability of the age relaxation. (Para 9 , 10)
6. petitioner's arguments against the respondents' objections. (Para 11 , 12)
7. court’s observations on the distinction between posts not found in om. (Para 14 , 15 , 16)
8. nature of posts and distinction for age relaxation applicability (Para 17)
9. court's reasoning for setting aside the previous order. (Para 19 , 20)
10. final directions and conclusion of the case. (Para 21 , 22)

JUDGMENT

Talwant Singh, J. The case of the petitioner is that, after acquiring the necessary qualification, he applied for the position of Junior Forensic/Assistant Chemical Examiner (Documents) with respondent nos. 2 and 3 and joined the said position on 18.04.2014 on contractual basis and still continuing in the same post.

2. On 11.06.2019, the respondent no. 2, i.e., Govt. of NCT of Delhi issued a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

DELHI HIGH COURTRAJIV SHAKDHER, TALWANT SINGHSyed Ahmar Ali Hashmi – AppellantVersusUnion Public Service Commission – Respondent

DELHI HIGH COURT
RAJIV SHAKDHER, TALWANT SINGH
Syed Ahmar Ali Hashmi – Appellant
Versus
Union Public Service Commission – Respondent