Delhi High Court - Orders
Manish Negi & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors on 22 August, 2024
Author: Rekha Palli
Bench: Rekha Palli
$~14
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 6700/2017, CM APPL. 37769/2023
MANISH NEGI & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Mr. Anshuman
Mehrotra, Mr. Nikunj Arora, Mr.
Amrit Kaul, Mr. Arjun Panwar and
Mr. Prahil Sharma, Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Rakesh Kumar, CGSC with Mr.
Sunil, Adv. for UOI.
Mr. Nikhil Bhardwaj, Adv. for R-4 to
R-22.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR
ORDER
% 22.08.2024
1. The petitioners, who were remustered as Head Constable (Combatised Ministerial) pursuant to the remustering examination held between 18.10.2011 to 05.11.2011, have approached this Court being aggrieved by the seniority granted to respondent nos. 4 to 22 over them, even though the said respondents had qualified only in the subsequent remustering examination held between 16.01.2012 to 08.02.2012.
2. The primary submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/08/2024 at 18:15:25 the examination in which respondent nos. 4 to 22 were found successful was conducted consequent to the decision taken by the respondent nos. 1 to 3 on 02.12.2011 to cancel the earlier examination held between January to February, 2011; the said cancellation order dated 02.12.2011 was, however, found to be illegal and was subsequently set aside by the Uttarakhand High Court on 28.02.2012 in a batch of writ petitions including WP (S/S) No. 1840/2011. He, therefore, contends that the very holding of examination between 16.01.2012 to 08.02.2012 in which the respondent no. 4 to 22 were selected was a nullity. In any event, the respondent nos. 4 to 22, having been admittedly selected in the examination held between 16.01.2012 to 08.02.2012 could not have been granted seniority over the petitioners, who were selected for remustering in November 2011 itself.
3. Mr. Rakesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 3, while not denying that the decision to cancel the remustering examination held between 18.10.2011 to 05.11.2011 was found to be illegal and consequently set aside by the Uttarakhand High Court, contends that the respondent nos. 1 to 3 have granted seniority to the respondent nos. 4 to 22 over the petitioners only pursuant to orders passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 2588/2013 on 21.11.2014, wherein it was specifically directed that these respondents would be granted seniority with reference to their batchmates, who had been selected in the examination held between 18.10.2011 to 05.11.2011.
4. Having perused the said order, we find that the said writ petition was filed by respondent nos. 4 to 22 along with other similarly placed persons and disposed of on 21.11.2014 by a short order by simply taking on record the statement of respondent nos. 4 to 22 that their grievance had been This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/08/2024 at 18:15:25 satisfied as their names had been included in the list prepared pursuant to the remustration examination held between January to February, 2012. It was in these circumstances that this Court directed the respondent nos. 1 to 3 to issue appointment letters for the post of Head Constable (CM) in favour of the petitioners therein i.e. respondent nos. 4 to 22 and grant them retrospective seniority as per their merit along with their batchmates.
5. The official respondents, however, realising that the respondent nos. 4 to 22 could not be inter-spaced with the 82 candidates, who had been already selected pursuant to the remustering examination held between 18.10.2011 to 05.11.2011, chose to place the candidates selected in the examination held between January, 2012 to February, 2012 en-bloc at the bottom of the list of those 82 candidates.
6. In these circumstances, even though the respondent nos. 1 to 3 are correct in urging that in view of the specific direction issued by the Court on 21.11.2014, they had no other option but to grant retrospective seniority to respondent nos. 4 to 22, we are unable to appreciate as to why the fact that a further remustering examination had already been held in October/November, 2011 i.e. prior to the examination held between January to February, 2012 with petitioners and other similarly placed candidates having appointed in November, 2011, was not brought to the notice of this Court at the time of hearing of the said writ petition.
7. The respondent nos. 1 to 3 are accordingly directed to file, within four weeks, a detailed affidavit explaining whether the factum of petitioner's having been remustered prior to respondent nos. 4 to 22 was brought to the notice of the Court and if not why.
8. List on 25.11.2024.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/08/2024 at 18:15:26
9. On the next date, the Registry will forward the record of WP(C) 2588/2013, if still available.
REKHA PALLI, J SHALINDER KAUR, J AUGUST 22, 2024/ss This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/08/2024 at 18:15:26