Head Constable Dharam Pal vs The Commissioner Of Police on 23 April, 2012
4. The counsel for the applicant vehemently and strenuously
contended that the said order dated 22.08.2013 passed by the Hon'ble
High Court is judgment in rem and had laid down the law and that the
respondents should have selected and appointed the applicant against the
post meant for UR category. The counsel for the respondents equally
vehemently submitted that the recruitment is of the year 2009 and that
the unfilled vacancies were carried forward to the next recruitment of
3 OA 3735/2014
2012 and in so far as the applicants in the above stated review petitions
before the Hon'ble High Court had filed their respective petitions before
the unfilled vacancies were carried forward and that the order of the
Hon'ble High Court dated 22.08.2013 is not a judgment in rem and it was
confined only to the review applicants before the High Court and as such
the applicant is a fence-sitters and he is not entitled for any relief. The
counsel for the respondents further submitted that in an identical case of
Hariom, Head Constable Vs. The Commissioner of Police and Ors
(Writ Petition (C) No. 10489/2015, this Tribunal dismissed the OA which
has been upheld by the Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 18.05.2016,
the operative portion of which is extracted below:-