Partly allowed

Sumer Singh v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC7 May 2024W.P.(C)/6458/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court disposed of two writ petitions seeking relief regarding CISF training and medical examinations. The court directed the Standing Screening Committee to verify the petitioners' antecedents within eight weeks before taking further action.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Standing Screening Committee to decide on antecedents within eight weeks; related CM Applications dismissed as infructuous.

Sumer Singh Vs Union of India & Ors. — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~55 & 58

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6458/2024, CM APPLs. 26926/2024 & 26927/2024 SUMER SINGH

¶3

..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sahil Mongia, Mr. Rahul Yadav, Mr. Shahil Rao, Mr. Yash Yadav, Mr. Abhishek Yadav and Ms. Divya Sharma, Advs. versus

¶4

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

¶5

..... Respondents Through: Ms. Uma Prasuna Bachu, Sr. PC with Mr. Rajat Rajoria, GP for UOI

¶6

AND

¶7

+ W.P.(C) 6464/2024, CM APPLs. 26936/2024 & 26937/2024 VIKASH NAGAR

¶8

..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sahil Mongia, Mr. Rahul Yadav, Mr. Shahil Rao, Mr. Yash Yadav, Mr. Abhishek Yadav and Ms. Divya Sharma, Advs. versus

¶9

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

¶10

..... Respondents Through: Ms. Ritu Reniwal, Sr. PC with Mr. Yashaswi SK, GP for UOI with SI Prahalad and SI N.B. Thilak

¶11

CORAM:

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

¶13

O R D E R % 07.05.2024

¶14

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 10/05/2024 at 11:52:50

¶15

CM APPL. 26927/2024 (for exemption) in W.P.(C) 6458/2024 CM APPL. 26937/2024 (for exemption) in W.P.(C) 6464/2024

¶16

Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.

¶17

Applications are disposed of.

¶18

W.P.(C) 6458/2024, CM APPL. 26926/2024 W.P.(C) 6464/2024, CM APPL. 26936/2024

¶19

These applications have been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers:

¶20

W.P.(C) 6458/2024

¶21

“In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue:

¶22

i. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari and/or any other appropriate writ of the like nature and/or directions to quash and set aside the impugned letter dt. 27.12.2023 issued by the Respondent No. 3 to the Petitioner whereby the Respondent No. 3 mechanically referred the candidature of the Petitioner to the Standing Screening Committee solely on the ground that name of the Petitioner is reflected in some Final Report ignoring the settled law that such offences do not come within the meaning of moral turpitude & ensuing order(s) and/or directions to the Respondents permitting the Petitioner to continue to undergo medical examination and ongoing training for the post of Constable-cum-Driver in CISF and;

¶23

ii. A writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate Writ of the like nature and/or directions to the Respondents to permit the Petitioner to continue to undergo medical examination and ongoing training for the post of Constable-cum-Driver in CISF and/or;

¶24

iii. Pass any such other or further order(s) in favour of the Petitioner as deemed fit in the given fact and circumstances and in the interest of justice.”

¶25

¶26

W.P.(C) 6464/2024

¶27

“In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue:

¶28

i. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari and/or any other appropriate writ of the like nature and/or directions to quash and set aside the impugned letter dt. 04.04.2024 issued by the Respondent No. 3 to the Petitioner whereby the Respondent No. 3 mechanically referred the candidature of the Petitioner to the Standing Screening Committee solely on the ground that the name of the Petitioner is reflected in some Final Report ignoring the factum that said case has been filed against the Petitioner by his wife and such charges imposed on the Petitioner and his family are just an exercise to falsely implicate all the relatives of the Petitioner along with the Petitioner in matrimonial disputes and ensuing order(s) and/or directions to the Respondents permitting the Petitioner to continue to undergo training in terms of their joining letter of an even date of 04.04.2024 for the post of Constable cum-Driver in CISF and;

¶29

ii. A writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate Writ of the like nature and/or directions to the Respondents to permit the Petitioner to continue to undergo ongoing training in terms of the Petitioner’s joining letter dated 05.01.2024 for the post of Constable-cum-Driver in CISF and/or;

¶30

iii. Pass any such other or further order(s) in favour of the Petitioner as deemed fit in the given fact and circumstances and in the interest of justice.”

¶31

Our attention has been drawn to the order dated April 23, 2024, passed in the batch of writ petitions wherein this Court noting the fact that the case of the petitioners therein have been referred to the Standing Screening Committee to decide the correctness / antecedents of the

¶32

This is a digitally signed order.

¶33

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 10/05/2024 at 11:52:50

¶34

petitioners, who have submitted their documents to the respondents for appointment has disposed of the petitions by stating in paragraph 4 stated as under:

¶35

“4. Noting the said submission, we dispose of the writ petitions by stating that the Standing Screening Committee shall decide the correctness / antecedents of the documents produced by the petitioners, showing their proof in support of the fact that no case / FIR is pending against them, within eight weeks from today. Based on the decision of the Standing Screening Committee, further action shall be taken in accordance with law.”

¶36

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the similar order be passed in this case as well.

¶37

Accordingly, we dispose of the writ petitions by stating that the Standing Screening Committee shall decide the correctness / antecedents of the documents produced by the petitioners / petitioners, and communicate the decision within eight weeks from today as an outer limit. Based on the decision of the Standing Screening Committee, further action shall be taken in accordance with law.

¶38

The writ petitions are disposed of.

¶39

CM APPL. 26926/2024 in W.P.(C) 6458/2024 CM APPL. 26936/2024 in W.P.(C) 6464/2024

¶40

Dismissed as infructuous.

¶41

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

¶42

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J

¶43

MAY 7, 2024 /aky

¶44

Sumer Singh v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumer Singh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Zenith Leisure Holidays Ltd. Vs Union of India & Anr.

Shiv Raj Singh Vs the Board of Discipline of Icai & Anr.

Jakson Power Private Limited Vs Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs & Anr.

Raj Gangwani Vs Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University & Ors.

Nand Kishor Agarwal Vs Union of India & Anr.

Mohd. Rafi Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

N Vs the Principal Secretary Health and Family Welfare Department & Ors.

Vinod Kumar Pandey Vs M/S General Industrial Company

Gulshan Upadhyay Vs Union of India & Ors.

Devendra Kumar Arya & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Uttam Samadder Vs the Union of India Thr. Secretary Home Affair, Government of India & Ors.

Hritik Yadav Vs Director General, Rpf and Ors.

Ashutosh Kumar Singh Vs Union of India & Anr.

Zonunthari Vs Director General, Cisf