Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
RAJIV SHAKDHER, TALWANT SINGH
Kousik Das Mahapatra – Appellant
Versus
Govt. of NCT Delhi – Respondent
ORDER
[Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19]
Rajiv Shakdher, J. (Oral)
1. This writ petition is directed against an interlocutory order dated 10.01.2022, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (in short `the Tribunal') in O.A. No.34/2022.
2. Issue notice.
2.1. Mr Nitesh Kumar Singh accepts service on behalf of respondent nos.1 to 3, in effect, Government of NCT of Delhi (GNCTD), while Mr Naresh Kaushik accepts service on behalf of respondent no.4 i.e., Union Public Service Commission (UPSC).
3. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, in view of the directions that we propose to pass, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal, at this stage itself.
3.1. Mr U. Srivastava, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, says that, although, notice has been issued by the Tribunal, the grievance of the petitioner, presently, is that no interim direction has been issued in the matter.
3.2. According to Mr Srivastava, the last date for filing the applications qua the subject examination expires today i.e., 13.01.2022.
3.3. To be noted, respondent no.4/UPSC has issued an advertisement no.19/21 inviting applic
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.
Judicial review limits interim relief before a successful original application; emphasis placed on the need for expeditious handling of pending cases.
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 final decision on the merits of a case should be adjudicated at a later stage by the appropriate tribunal.
The court emphasized the importance of considering the petitioner for appointment in line with the provisions of the Recruitment Rules, 2015.
The court established that age relaxation provisions must be interpreted to include current examinations to ensure justice and avoid unnecessary hardship.
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
