Disposed

Rohit Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC5 Mar 2018W.P.(C)/2000/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court directed petitioner to submit a representation regarding the evaluation of his OMR sheet rejected due to a missing Question Paper Series, relying on a previous precedent. Respondent must pass a speaking order within six weeks if potential vacancies exist.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to make a representation within one week; respondent to pass a speaking order within six weeks regarding unfilled vacancies and evaluation feasibility.

Rohit Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶2

Date of Order: March 05, 2018

¶3

W.P.(C) 2000/2018 & C.M.8233/2018

¶4

ROHIT KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. CSS Tomar, Advocate

¶5

versus

¶6

UNION OF INDIA & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Jaswinder Singh, Advocate

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

¶9

O R D E R (ORAL)

¶10

A mandamus is sought to third respondent to evaluate petitioner’s OMR Sheet and to appoint him on the post of Optical Worker if he has qualified. In pursuance of Advertisement (Annexure P-1) petitioner had applied for the post of Optical Worker and as per the List of Candidature Cancelled (Annexure P-6) , petitioner’s Answer-sheet was not evaluated due to “MISSING QP SERIES”.

¶11

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that it was due to inadvertence that the Question Paper Series was not mentioned by petitioner on his Answer-sheet and on account of this inadvertent error, petitioner ought not to suffer. To submit so, reliance is placed upon decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Union of India and Ors. v. Sumit Kumar, 2017 SCC Onlince Del 10138.

¶12

Page 1 of 2

¶13

¶14

Learned counsel for respondents submits that the list of disqualified candidates (Annexure P-6) was made public way back in September, 2017 and so, this petition deserves to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. It is pointed out by learned counsel for respondents that it was made clear in the OMR Sheet that if any details of question booklet series, etc., are not filled up by the candidates, then the Answer-sheets would not be evaluated under any circumstances.

¶15

Upon hearing, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of this petition with direction to petitioner to make a Representation to third respondent within a week from today, while relying upon Division Bench’s decision in Sumit Kumar (supra) and upon receipt of said Representation, third respondent shall pass a speaking order thereon within a period of six weeks and it shall also indicate if there are any unfilled vacancies of Optical Workers and disclose as to why petitioner’s Answer-sheet cannot be evaluated in view of decision in Sumit Kumar (supra) and the fate of the Representation be made known to petitioner within a week thereafter, so that petitioner may avail of the remedies as available in law, if need be. 5. With aforesaid directions, this petition and the application are disposed of.

¶16

Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the parties.

(SUNIL GAUR)

JUDGE

MARCH 05, 2018 s

Page 2 of 2

Rohit Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Interglobe Aviation Ltd. Vs Additional Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.

Prem Pal Vs Institute of Home Economics

Sh. Rakesh Kumar Jain Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Anr.

Smt. Indu Bala Jain Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Anr.

Cdr Rohit Mehra (0369W) Vs Union of India and Ors.

Sushil Chauhan & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Mr Rajesh Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.

Syam Kumar Vs Govt of NCT of Dlehi & Ors.

M/S Aryan Freight Lines Vs Dy. Commissioner of Principal Commissioner Custom Department and Ors.

Shalini Chitkara Vs Government of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Jitender Singh Bhandari & Anr. Vs Union of Indai & Ors.

Sh. Sunil Kumar Gupta Vs Bses Yamunar Powar Ltd.

Azad Singh Vs Union of India & Anr.

Mahendra Gupta and Anr. Vs Delhi Legislative Assembly Secretariat and Ors.