AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Arindam Lodh, J
Heard Mr. A. Pal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. B. Majumder, learned Dy. SGI appearing for the respondents-Union of India.
The plea of the petitioner is that in a selection process, he secured 55.1059 marks which is evident from online RTI status form related to the petitioner. But, he has not been appointed. However, one UR candidate who secured 39.98149 marks and another Sagar Debnath, who secured 46.26 marks had been appointed.
Learned Dy. SGI has submitted that the selection process was initiated in the year 2018 and the same was completed on 04.03.2020 which includes appointments also. So everything is settled by now and the petition is badly barred by delay and laches.
In the aforesaid background, let a notice be issued calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why a rule should not be issued as prayed for; and/or as to why such further order/s should not be passed as to this court may seem fit and proper.
Notice is made returnable within 6(six) weeks.
Since all the respondents have already entered their appearance, no formal notice is called for.
List the matter on 19.03.2024. In the meantime, the respondents may file their counter affidavits, if they so desire.