IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
DINESH – Appellant
Versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. – Respondent
$~26
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 07.01.2026
+ W.P.(C) 12419/2024
DINESH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Nikhil Palli, Ms. Niyati
Razdan, Advocates.
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Naginder Benipal SPC for
UOI with Mr. Ankit Siwach, Mr. Udit Vaghela, Mr. Arjun Baliyan, Mr. Saarthak Sethi, Mr. Jaskaran Singh, Advocates
with Head Constable Vikas.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN
J U D G M E N T (ORAL) ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.
1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 07.06.2024 (hereafter ‘impugned order’), passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’) in O.A. No. 1809/2017 titled as
Dinesh (OBC) vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr
2. Admittedly, the petitioner, in the revised result, got 70 marks whereas the minimum benchmark was 71 marks. Initially, the
petitioner was selected for the post of Head Constable as he had obtained 67 marks which was the minimum benchmark in the written test.
3. Subsequently, the result was revised on 14.10.2015 and the marks of the petitioner in the written test wer
The court upheld the merit list based on the cut-off marks and dismissed the petition seeking appointment to the post of Head Constable (Radio Mechanic).
The main legal point established is that the plea for parity with appointed candidates is not applicable if the petitioner had not been appointed, and the court has the authority to quash an order if....
Petitioners did not have a vested right of appointment and did not qualify for the post.
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.