Disposed

Aanand Rathi v. Union of India and Ors.

Delhi HC10 Sept 2024W.P.(C)/12700/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the withdrawal of an appointment offer to the petitioner for CISF. The Court directed the respondents to reconsider the petitioner's case after accounting for his recent acquittal in a criminal case, granting a timeline for this review.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted two weeks to submit a representation; respondents to dispose of it within six weeks with a speaking order after considering the acquittal order.

Aanand Rathi Vs Union of India and Ors. — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~62

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 12700/2024 & CM APPL. 52869/2024 –Int. dir., CM APPL. 52870/2024 –Ex.

¶4

AANAND RATHI .....Petitioner Through: Mr.Sahil Mongia with Mr.Yash Yadav, Ms.Sanjana Samor and Mr.Samir, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondent Through: Mr.Vivek Goyal, CGSC with Mr.Gokul Sharma, GP, Mr.K.B.Singh, Adv. AC Arjun Mahato, SI Prahlad, SI Amit Kumar.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR O R D E R % 10.09.2024

¶8

The petitioner, who is aspiring to join the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) as a Constable(Driver) has approached this Court assailing the order dated 03.09.2024 vide which the offer of appointment made to him has been withdrawn by the respondents.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order has been passed on the premise that the petitioner was involved in a criminal case, without appreciating the fact that he already stands acquitted in the said criminal case, which was in any event based on petty offences not involving moral turpitude.

¶10

A bare perusal of the writ petition shows that a copy of the said acquittal order has not been placed on record. When faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw

¶11

This is a digitally signed order.

¶12

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 12/09/2024 at 12:21:20

¶13

the petition with liberty to move a comprehensive representation against the impugned order before the respondents. He, however, prays that the respondents be directed to consider the petitioner’s case afresh in the light of the acquittal order.

¶14

Even though learned counsel for the respondents opposes this limited request, we are of the considered view that taking into account that this acquittal order was not available with the respondents when they rejected the petitioner’s claim for appointment, it would be in the interest of justice that his case is reconsidered by the respondents as per law.

¶15

We, accordingly, dispose of the writ petition by granting the petitioner two weeks time to make a representation to the respondents, which representation will be disposed by them within a period of six weeks by passing a reasoned and speaking order after taking into account the order vide which the petitioner has been acquitted in the criminal case.

¶16

Needless to state, in case, the petitioner is still aggrieved, it will be open for him to seek legal recourse as permissible in law.

¶17

The writ petition, along with the pending applications, is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶18

REKHA PALLI, J

¶19

SHALINDER KAUR, J

¶20

SEPTEMBER 10, 2024/sr

¶21

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 12/09/2024 at 12:21:20

Aanand Rathi v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aanand Rathi v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sangeeta Bakshi & Ors. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Urmila Jaiswal Vs Employees State Insurance Corporation and Ors.

Air Force Naval Housing Board Vs Central Bank of India Branch Air Force Station & Ors.

Mmtc Pamp India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs the Local Committee South District & Ors.

Akhil Dilli Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Regd & Anr. Vs Govt.of N.C.T.Delhi & Ors.

Sanjay Yadav Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Msc Agency (I) Pvt. Ltd. Vs UOI and Ors.

M/S Osm Projects Private Limited, through Its Director Surender Sharma & Anr. Vs Union of India through Chairman Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs Cbic Departme

Surender Pal Singh Vs Union of India through Director General Cisf & Ors.

Union of India & Ors. Vs Ex Nk Dsc Chhering Angchok

Manish Joshi Vs Director General,Coast Guard & Ors.

Sartaj Singh Chahal Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ex. Ct. Shyam Sunder Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ishaque Sharif Vs Union of India & Anr.