Disposed

Raj Kishor Singh Yadav and Ors. v. Union of India and Anr.

Delhi HC3 Jul 2024W.P.(C)/8919/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposes of a writ petition challenging errors in the CPIFC answer key for Assistant Sub-inspectors recruitment. The Court accepted the respondents' undertaking to examine disputed questions via an Expert Committee and closed the petition without passing any mandatory direction.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to examine disputed answer key questions via an Expert Committee within two weeks.

Raj Kishor Singh Yadav and Ors. Vs Union of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~9

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 8919/2024, CM APPL. 36403/2024 –Int. Dir

¶4

RAJ KISHOR SINGH YADAV AND ORS

¶5

.....Petitioners

¶6

Through: Mr. Rajat Arora, Mr. Niraj Kumar, Mr. Sneh Vardhan and Mr. Sourabh Mahla, Advs.

¶7

versus

¶8

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Neeraj, Mr. Vedansh Anand, Mr. Mahesh Kumar Rathore, Advs. with Mr. Sanjay Kumar, IMS and Mr. Prahlad Devenda, SI, CISF for R-1 and R-2.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

% 03.07.2024

¶13

The petitioners who are aspirants of joining the CISF as Assistant Sub-inspectors (Executive) pursuant to the selection process by way of LDCE initiated in the year 2022 have approached this Court seeking the following relief:-

¶14

“a. Pass a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ /orders /directions to the Respondents for the Re-Evaluation Of the Results and awarding the full marks for the wrong questions/ answer and consequentially Permitting the Petitioners to Participate in the further round of Recruitment Process.”

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the answers as per the answer key provided by the respondents to the four questions set out in paragraph 8 of the writ petition are patently erroneous. He, therefore, prays

¶16

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 22/07/2024 at 15:46:05

¶17

that the writ petition be allowed and the respondents be directed to suitably correct the answer key qua the four questions.

¶18

Issue notice. Mr. Neeraj, learned counsel for the respondents accept notice and submits that taking into account the grounds raised by the petitioners, the respondents will get the answer key to these four questions examined by an Expert Committee within a period of two weeks from today. He further assures the Court on instructions that in case the Expert Committee recommends any change in any of the answers, due benefit thereof would be given to the petitioners and other similarly placed candidates. Further the mere fact that the training of ASI’s already selected may commence in the meanwhile, will not come in way of the petitioners being appointed with due seniority.

¶19

In light of this fair stand taken by the respondents, the writ petition is disposed of by granting the respondents two weeks time to get the answer key qua the four questions referred to in paragraph 8 of the writ petition examined by an Expert Committee. Needless to state in case, the petitioners are still aggrieved by any order passed by the respondents, it will be open for them to seek legal recourse as permissible in law.

¶20

REKHA PALLI, J.

¶21

SHALINDER KAUR, J.

¶22

JULY 03, 2024 SU

¶23

This is a digitally signed order.

¶24

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 22/07/2024 at 15:46:05

Raj Kishor Singh Yadav and Ors. v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kishor Singh Yadav and Ors. v. Union of India and Anr.

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

Ashok Kinra Vs Central Cottage Industries Corporation and Ors.

Misha Textiles Private Limited (through Director) Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 17(1) Delhi & Ors.

Vesuvius India Limited Vs Steel Authority of India Limited & Anr.

Manav Mandir Mission Trust Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ram Prakash Sehrawat Vs Delhi Development Authority through Its Vice Chairman & Anr.

Ashok Kumar Jain Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Satya Prakash Bagla Vs Directorate of Enforcement

Akash Gupta Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Abhishek Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ritu Rai Vs Union of India and Ors.

Anil Kumar Uniyal Vs Union of India and Ors.

Nupur S Kulshrestha Vs Union of India & Anr.

Mr Mahajan Ram and Ors. Vs the Union of India & Ors.

Sarika Devi Vs Director General Cisf and Others