High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 02 DEL CK 0459

Leslie K. David vs Centre For Development Of Telematics

Delhi High Court · Decided on 20 February 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sunil Gaur, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 1596 Of 2018, Civil Miscellaneous No. 6547 Of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

20 paragraphs · 370 words

Sunil Gaur, J

1.

Declaration of result of departmental examination conducted by respondent in terms of circular/Advertisement of 29th September, 2016 subject to

the outcome of Writ Petition No.21682/2016 pending before the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore is sought in this petition.

2.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner had undertaken the said departmental examination and result of the said departmental

examination has not been declared. Attention of this Court is drawn to respondent’s Communication of 22nd September, 2017 (Annexure P-3

Colly) wherein petitioner’s request to declare Executive Exam Result has not been acceded while pointing out that the result of the said

examination has been kept in sealed cover and has not been declared as the matter is sub judice and that directions have to be sought from the High

Court of Karnataka in this respect. It is pointed out that an e-mail of 2nd November, 2017 was received from respondent, whereby the candidates

were called upon to furnish an undertaking to the effect that if they are selected to the Executive Post, then they may be reverted back to their

previous position and salary level if the recruitment in question is quashed. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that an undertaking to the aforesaid

effect has already been furnished by petitioner to respondent in November, 2017 and there is no court order restraining respondent from declaring the

result of the selection in question and so the respondent be directed to declare the result subject to the outcome of the writ petition pending in the High

Court of Karnataka.

3.

Since petitioner has not made any effective Representation after furnishing of the undertaking, therefore, it is deemed appropriate to permit

petitioner to file a concise Representation to respondent within a week and if such a representation is received then the respondent shall pass a

speaking order thereon within four weeks and if deemed appropriate, obtain appropriate orders from the High Court of Karnataka, if such a petition is

pending there. The fate of the Representation be made known to petitioner within a week thereafter, so that petitioner may take recourse of law, if

need be.

4.

With aforesaid directions, this petition and the application are disposed of.

Dasti.