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 selection contexts.

JUDGMENT

[Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19]

Rajiv Shakdher, J. (Oral)

CM APPL. 35032-33/2021

1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 11375/2021

2. With the consent of the counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal, at this stage itself.

3. This writ petition is directed against an interlocutory order dated 14.09.2021, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal [in short, "the Tribunal"].

3.1. The impugned order appears to have been passed in the interlocutory application i.e., M.A. No.2153/2021 and the main matter i.e., O.A. No.925/2021.

3.2. The petitioners before us are aggrieved by the interim direction issued by the Tribunal, vide order dated 14.09.2021.

4. At this juncture, we may note that, this is the second round for the petitioners, inasmuch as they approached this Court on an earlier occasion as well, when interim protection was not granted by the Tribunal.

4.1. The petitioners had filed a writ petition i.e., W.P.(C) No.7917/2021. The said writ petition was directed against the order dated 22.07.2021, passed by the Tribunal, in the very same O.A. i.e., O.A. No.925/2021.

4.2. On 06.08.2021, we had disposed of the aforementioned writ petition, with the following observations:

"2. This writ petition is directed against the interim order dated 22.07.2021, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (in short `the tribunal') in OA No.925/2021.

2.1. The Tribunal has fixed the main matter for final disposal on 24.11.2021.

3. Mr. Gaurav Gupta, who appears on behalf of the petitioners, says that the main matter will be rendered infructuous, as the selection process will get over on 16.09.2021.

3.1. To be noted, in the order dated 22.07.2021, the Tribunal has indicated that, the final selection process concerning Combined Graduate Level Examination, 2019 shall be subject to the final outcome in the main matter i.e. O.A.No.925/2021.

3.2. Mr. Gupta says that, the respondents were given three opportunities to file a reply despite which reply has not been filed by the respondents.

3.3 In this behalf, Mr. Gupta has drawn our attention to the fact [which is also noticed by the Tribunal in the impugned order] that, opportunity was given by the Tribunal to the respondents to file a reply in the aforesaid OA on following dates i.e. 30.04.2021, 07.07.2021 and lastly, via the impugned order, dated 22.07.2021.

3.4. We are told by Mr. Gupta that, the reply has not been filed, as yet, although, the extended timeframe [i.e. two weeks, granted via the impugned order] is coming to an end shortly.

3.5. Mr. Rakesh Kumar, who appears on advance notice on behalf of the respondents, does not dispute the fact that, the respondents have taken time from the Tribunal, to file a reply, as indicated above, on three occasions.

3.6. Mr. Kumar says that, a reply will be filed within the timeframe accorded by the Tribunal, vide order dated 22.07.2021.

3.7. Mr. Kumar says that, the best way forward in the matter would be to advance the date of hearing before the Tribunal in O.A.No.925/2021, as that is the only way to avoid complications in the matter.

4. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, list the matter i.e. O.A.No.925/2021 before the concerned Registrar of the Tribunal on 13.08.2021 to ensure that the pleadings in the matter are completed.

4.1. The matter i.e. OA No. 925/2021 will be placed before the concerned Benc