AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Hon’ble Mr. R. N. Singh, Member (J):
In the present OA, the applicant is aggrieved by withholding of his result through Annexure-A/2 Show Cause Notice dated 27.05.2013, vide which, it has been proposed by the respondents to cancel his candidature and debar him for five years.
The brief facts, leading to the present OA are that the applicant participated in the selection process under the Combined Graduation Level examination 2012. The results of the said examination were declared on 08.02.2013, however the result of the applicant was withheld by the respondents. Revised results were published on 13.05.2013 and again the result of the applicant was withheld.
The applicant has prayed for the following reliefs.
“(a)quash and set aside the impugned orders/actions of the respondents placed Annexure A/1 and Annexure A/2.
(b)direct the respondents to further consider the applicant for appointment to the notified post in the allocated service and state and appoint her as such with all consequential benefits including seniority and monetary benefits.
(c)award costs of the proceedings and
(d)pass any other order/direction which this Hon’ble Tribunal deem fit and proper in favour
of the applicant and against the respondents in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
No counter reply has been filed. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the issue involved in the present case is squarely covered by the common order/judgment dated 13.07.2014 in OA No. 930/2014 and batch, which was confirmed by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in WP(C) No.9055/2014, and further upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP No.2836-38/2017 titled Staff Selection Commission Through its Chairman & Anr. Vs. Sudesh
It is also not in dispute that pursuant to the impugned Show Cause Notice, the applicant has filed detailed reply. Earlier, on 25.04.2016, a statement was made on behalf of the respondents through their learned counsel Mr. S.M. Arif that the issue involved in the present OA has been pending before the Hon’ble Apex Court and in view of such statement made on behalf of the respondents, the matter was adjourned sine-die, with liberty to either party to seek revival of the same, after the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court.
Today, at the outset, learned counsel for the
respondents Mr. Arif submits, under instructions, that the reply of the applicant and/or the claim of the applicant in the present OA could not be considered by the respondent in the absence of any order from this Tribunal.
In view of the aforesaid, the present OA is partly allowed, with direction to the respondents to consider the reply of the applicant, in response to the impugned So Cause Notice, taking into account the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sudesh (supra), and pass a speaking and reasoned order. It is further directed that, if on such consideration, the applicant is found fit for appointment and/or is appointed, the consequential benefits shall be granted to him, as granted to the applicant in the case of Sudesh (supra). The necessary order shall be passed by the respondents, as expeditiously as possible, and preferably within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
OA stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. No costs.