SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(All) 28

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, YASHWANT VARMA
UNION OF INDIA – Appellant
Versus
PARUL PUNIA – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Vivek Singh for the Appellants; Akash Khare for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Dr. Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud, C.J.—In pursuance of an advertisement that was issued for appointment of men and women constables in the Railway Protection Force in North Eastern Railway, the respondent applied for selection. The respondent qualified in the written examination, physical efficiency test and interview but was rejected at the stage of medical examination on the ground of having failed to meet the standards specified for ocular vision. This led to the filing of a writ petition (Writ Petition No. 58721 of 2014) in which an order was passed in the following terms:

“Accordingly, without going into merit of the claim of the petitioner, it is hereby directed that the respondent No. 3 shall decide the representation of the petitioner for which he is permitted to file fresh representation, which shall be decided by the respondent No. 3 on its own merit, in accordance with law, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order before the said respondents.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.”

2. The representation submitted by the respondent was considered and rejected by t












Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top