Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
RAJIV SHAKDHER, TALWANT SINGH
Radharani Panda – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
[Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19]
Rajiv Shakdher, J. (Oral)--Issue notice.
1.1. Mr. Kaushal Gautam accepts service on behalf of the contesting respondent i.e., respondent no.2-All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi (AIIMS).
2. Accordingly, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal, at this stage itself, based on the record presently available with the court.
3. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 03.12.2021, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (in short `the Tribunal') in O.A.No.2748/2021.
3.1. A perusal of the record shows that the petitioner had approached the Tribunal to seek a direction of the kind that would compel respondent no.2/AIIMS to exercise its power of age relaxation, as conferred upon it under Recruitment Rules, 2015.
3.2. The case set up by the petitioner before the Tribunal was that, insofar as the Nursing Officer Recruitment Common Eligibility Test [in short "NORCET"] 2020 was concerned, respondent no.2/AIIMS had exercised the power of age relaxation vested in it not only vis-a'-vis Central Govern
The court held that age relaxation in recruitment must be uniformly exercised and procedural fairness should guide the Tribunal's decision-making on such applications.
The court emphasized the importance of considering the petitioner for appointment in line with the provisions of the Recruitment Rules, 2015.
The court emphasized the necessity of interim relief in administrative matters to protect the rights of applicants pending adjudication.
If interim direction is not issued in matter, pending adjudication of petitioner’s cause, O.A. preferred by him will be rendered infructuous.
The final decision on the merits of a case should be adjudicated at a later stage by the appropriate tribunal.
Age relaxation in public recruitment is not a fundamental or inherent right and can only be granted if the specific recruitment rules of the employing department explicitly and legally provide for su....
Point of Law : Respondent authority has failed to exercise its power while dealing with the application for relaxation of the age, preferred by the petitioners.
The Central Administrative Tribunal cannot modify recruitment advertisement terms; it must adhere to established procedures and ensure compliance with legal standards in granting age relaxation.
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
