Nitin Kumar Jain vs Union of India

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

DELHI HIGH COURT
RAJIV SHAKDHER, TALWANT SINGH
Nitin Kumar Jain – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent

Table of Content
1. delay in filing affects claims (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. writ petition dismissed (Para 5)

JUDGMENT

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

Rajiv Shakdher, J. (Oral):

CM APPL. 47794/2021

1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 15171/2021

2. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 12.03.2020, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Delhi [in short "the Tribunal"] in TA No. 10/2017.

3. Mr Sumit Kumar, who appears for the petitioner, concedes that the instant writ petition was filed in and about 04.03.2021 i.e., nearly one year after the aforementioned impugned order had been passed.

3.1. The grievance articulated by the petitioner, albeit, in the second round, after the petitioner was relegated to the Tribunal, concerned the purported failure to clear the Central Teacher Eligibility Test, 2012 [in short `CTET'] by one [1] mark.

3.2. The petitioner claimed that the answer given by him against question no.108 was the correct answer, and not the one which finds mention in the answer key uploaded by the Central Board of Secondary Education [in short "CBSE"] i.e., respondent no.2.

3.3. To be noted, respondent

Click Here to Read the rest of this document