Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
RAJIV SHAKDHER, TALWANT SINGH
Vaibhav Malik – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition against interim order due to lack of relief. (Para 4) |
| 2. eligibility based on crucial experience date. (Para 5) |
| 3. disagreement on crucial date for eligibility. (Para 6) |
| 4. court's observations on preliminary requirements. (Para 7) |
| 5. order to rehear the interim relief application. (Para 8) |
| 6. court orders prompt attention to petitioners. (Para 9) |
| 7. judgment disposes of the writ petition. (Para 10) |
JUDGMENT
[Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19]
Rajiv Shakdher, J. (ORAL):-
CM APPL. 4290/2022
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 1504/2022 and CM APPL. 4289/2022
2. Issue notice.
2.1. Ms Bharathi Raju accepts notice on behalf of respondent no.1/DoPT, while Mr Sanjay Katyal accepts notice on behalf of respondent nos.2 to 4 i.e., the contesting respondents, in effect, Delhi Development Authority ('DDA').
3. With the consent of counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal, at this stage itself.
4. This writ petition is directed against an interlocutory order dated 10.01.2022, passed by the Central Administration Tribunal (in short 'the Tribunal') in O.A. No. 2857/2021.
4.1.
The court highlighted the necessity for the Tribunal to provide adequate reasoning when issuing interim orders and the importance of defining the crucial date based on recruitment rules.
The importance of considering the prima facie case, balance of convenience, and potential harm in granting interim relief, and the need for a reasoned interim order.
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....
The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of the seniority list and the implications of promotions made pursuant to LDCE for the year 2021-22, highlighting the importance of adhering ....
The court emphasized the necessity of interim relief in administrative matters to protect the rights of applicants pending adjudication.
Timeliness is essential in filing legal petitions; lack of explanation for delays leads to dismissal of writ petitions.
If interim direction is not issued in matter, pending adjudication of petitioner’s cause, O.A. preferred by him will be rendered infructuous.
The court's decision was based on the principle that the petitioners should appear in the examination as scheduled without prejudice to their rights and contentions before the Tribunal.
The court directed provisional participation in an interview while preserving the ability to contest eligibility, emphasizing that such permission does not confer rights pending further Tribunal acti....
Provisional participation in interview pending fresh action before the Tribunal
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
