Two writ petitions challenging Central Administrative Tribunal orders directing publication of answer keys and supply of OMR sheets are allowed, modified to require provision of materials only to respondents within six weeks.
Copies of OMR sheets and answer keys to be provided by petitioner only to respondents within six weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~23 & 24.
% Judgment dated 7th December, 2015
UNION OF INDIA ..... Petitioner
Through : Mr.V.S.R. Krishna, Adv.
versus
NAVEEN KUMAR AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Through : Mr.Ravinder Agarwal, Adv. for respondents no.2, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 10.
Through : Mr.V.S.R. Krishna, Adv.
versus
RUPESH KUMAR MANN & ORS ..... Respondents Through : Mr.Ravinder Agarwal, Adv for respondents no.1 to 7.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
G.S.SISTANI, J ( ORAL )
Page 1 of 3
W.P.(C) No.9834/2015 & 9915/2015
“ W. P. (C) 9834/2015 and 9915/2015
Challenge in these writ petitions is to the orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 01.05.2015 and 05.05.2015 by which a direction has been issued to the petitioner herein to publish the answer key on their website and also supply OMR sheets to the applicants.
Mr. Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that publishing the answer key on the website was not prayed by the respondents appearing before the Tribunal. After some hearing in the matter, on instructions, Mr. Krishna submits that the copies of OMR Sheets and the answer keys can be provided to the respondents alone but petitioner has hesitation in publishing the same on the website.
Issue notice to show cause as to why the petition be not admitted, returnable on 7th December, 2015. Notice be issued by all modes including dasti and through counsel who appeared before the Tribunal.
CM APPL. No. 23725/2015 (Stay) in W. P. (C) 9834/2015 and CM APPL. No. 24039/2015 (Stay) in W. P. (C) 9915/2015
Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the operation of the impugned order be stayed. He points out that a contempt petition has been filed. Heard. Till the next date of hearing, the operation of the impugned order is stayed.
Copy of the order be given dasti under the signatures of Court Master, as prayed. ”
Page 2 of 3
W.P.(C) No.9834/2015 & 9915/2015
modified in terms of the order passed by this Court on 28.10.2015.
G.S.SISTANI, J
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J
DECEMBER 07, 2015 msr
Page 3 of 3
W.P.(C) No.9834/2015 & 9915/2015
Union of India
Naveen Kumar and Ors.
Rupesh Kumar Mann and Ors.
G.S. Sistani
Sangita Dhingra Sehgal
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
