DELHI HIGH COURT
RAJIV SHAKDHER, TALWANT SINGH
Anurag Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Rajiv Shakdher, J.: (ORAL)
[Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19]
CM No.30133/2021
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
CM No.30132/2021
2. Via this application, the petitioner, inter alia, seeks exemption from filing a copy of the impugned order dated 31.08.2021. 2.1. We may note, even though the title of the application, refers to the impugned order dated 31.08.2021, however, inadvertently, in the prayer clause of the captioned application, it appears that a typographical error has crept in, inasmuch as the date of the impugned order, is mentioned, as 09.08.2021.
3. Mr. Anjuman Tripathy, who appears for the petitioner, says that, he was not able to file a copy of the impugned order dated 31.08.2021, as the said order was uploaded on the concerned website only, on 06.09.2020.
4. Mr. Tripathy has, however, screen-shared the copy of the impugned order, dated 31.08.2021. Mr. Ajay Digpaul, who appears for respondents/UOI, on advance notice, does not dispute the veracity of the said order.
5. Therefore, the application is disposed of, with a direction to the petitioner, to place the certified copy of the impugned order dated 31.08.2
The right to fair evaluation in examination contexts necessitates that technicalities, such as signature issues, be addressed without undermining a candidate's opportunity for assessment, ensuring pr....
The court declined to interfere with the tribunal's proceedings and emphasized the importance of the tribunal deciding the matter on the date fixed.
The court established that procedural integrity must be maintained in administrative hearings, emphasizing that all parties should be adequately notified and heard on issues regarding the reopening o....
The court affirmed the necessity for tribunal adherence to procedural fairness and the importance of protecting applicants' rights pending substantive hearings, particularly in examination and select....
A decision must be rendered by the same individuals who heard a case to ensure procedural fairness and consistency in adjudication.
The emergence of previously undisclosed evidence warrants review of administrative decisions to ensure fair adjudication.
Failure to supply entire order sheets and non-compliance with statutory provisions under section 82 Cr.P.C can lead to the quashing of the process.
Judicial review allows withdrawal of a writ petition with liberty to file a review petition when relief sought is unaddressed by the Tribunal.
Delay in filing a writ petition undermines its viability, especially when an expert opinion supports the decision being contested.
The court emphasized that dismissing a case without merit-based reasoning is improper, necessitating remand for a fresh adjudication.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.