Gauhati High Court
The Regional Director (North Eastern ... vs Umor Ali And 5 Ors on 7 August, 2023
Author: Sanjay Kumar Medhi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Medhi
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010093052023
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Review.Pet./62/2023
THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR (NORTH EASTERN REGION)
STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION, HOUSEFED COMPLEX, LAST GATE
BASISTHA ROAD, P.O. ASSAM, SACHIVALAYA, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06.
VERSUS
UMOR ALI AND 5 ORS.
S/O. AYUB ALI, VILL. BASHBARI NO.7, P.O. TILPUKHURI, P.S. MANIKPUR,
DIST. BONGAIGAON, ASSAM, PIN-783383.
2:THE UNION OF INDIA
REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS
(MHA)
NEWDELHI-110003.
3:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CRPF (RECRUITMENT BRANCH)
EAST BLOCK-7
LEVEL-4
SECTOR-01
R K PURAN
NEW DELHI-110066.
4:THE ASSTT. COMMANDANT
BORDER SECURITY FORCE
DHUBRI
BSF CAMPUS ALOMGANJ
P.O. ALAMGANJ
DIST. DHUBRI
ASSAM
Page No.# 2/3
PIN-783339.
5:THE COMMANDANT CUM PRESIDING OFFICER
CENTRAL ARMED POLICE FORCES (CAPFS) BOARD
GROUP CENTRE CRPF
NINE MILE
GUWAHATI-22.
6:THE DETAILED MEDICAL EXAMINATION BOARD HEADED BY ITS
PRESIDING OFFICER
GROUP CENTRE CRPF
NINE MILE
GUWAHATI-22
Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS. A GAYAN
Advocate for the Respondent :
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
ORDER
07.08.2023 Heard Ms. A. Gayan, learned CGC appearing for the review applicant, who by means of this application has prayed for review of a judgment and order dated 05.02.2021 passed by this Court in WP(C)/2535/2020. The learned counsel has submitted that the opposite party / writ petitioner had challenged a rejection slip dated 19.02.2020 in connection with a recruitment process for the post of Constable in CRPF. It is submitted that the cut off marks which was taken to be 35% was actually only in an initial stage of Computer Based Test and the same is different in the final merit list.
Apart from the fact that the rejection slip was on the ground of mismatch in the date of birth wherein there was no disclosure at tall regarding the grounds now taken, the present application also appears to be filed after more than 2(two) years from the Page No.# 3/3 date of judgment without there being any explanation.
Be that as it may, let notice be issued, returnable by 6(six) weeks.
Let steps be taken for service of notice upon the respondent no. 1, writ petitioner by registered post with A/D. Steps within two days.
The point of maintainability of this review application is however kept open.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant