Disposed¶25

Parmar Dishantkumar Subhashbhai v. Union of India

Delhi HC4 Jul 2025W.P.(C)/8976/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CISF Standing Screening Committee; referral decision challenged in writ petition; direction to decide within eight weeks; ordinarily no extension of time; reasons to be communicated if candidate found unsuitable; reliance on Waman Mahendra Navnath v UOI, MANU/DE/0978/2025 (four-week direction); requisition of outside information; Delhi High Court; C. Hari Shankar, J. and Ajay Digpaul, J.; decided 04.07.2025; W.P.(C) 8976/2025.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondents to ensure the Standing Screening Committee decides on the petitioner's application within eight weeks (ordinarily no extension), and to give reasons and communicate them to the petitioner if he is found unsuitable for appointment. ¶25

Parmar Dishantkumar Subhashbhai Vs Union of India — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~30

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 8976/2025 & CM APPL. 38342/2025

¶4

PARMAR DISHANTKUMAR SUBHASHBHAI .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Mandeep Baisala, Mr. Dhananjay Singh and Mr. Vivek Kumar, Vishwanath, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

UNION OF INDIA .....Respondent

¶8

Through: Ms. Shubhra Parashar and Mr. Virender Pratap Singh Charak Advs. along with DC Krishan Dass and Insp. Sanjay Kumar, CISF.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL

¶11

ORDER (ORAL)

¶12

% 04.07.2025

¶13

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

¶14

1. The petitioner has moved this Court by means of the present writ petition, challenging the decision of the respondent to refer the petitioner’s case to the Standing Screening Committee of the Central 1 Industrial Security Force .

¶15

2. Mr. Mandeep Baisala, learned Counsel for the petitioners has drawn our attention to an order dated 10 February 2025 passed by a Coordinate Division Bench of this Court in Waman Mahendra Navnath v UOI² in which this Court, in similar circumstances, has directed the Standing Screening Committee to take a decision within

¶16

1 “CISF” hereinafter

¶17

2 MANU/DE/0978/2025 Signature Not Verified

¶18

Signed By:AAKANSHAW.P.(C) 8976/2025 SHARMA Signing Da te:0 7.07.2025 19:34:29

¶19

Page 1 of 2

¶20

four weeks.

¶21

3. Ms. Shubhra Parashar, learned Counsel for the respondent prays that, in the present case, the respondents have to requisition information from outside and that, therefore, they may be given eight weeks.

¶22

4. She also submits that the next training schedule, which is also tentative, is also only after six months.

¶23

5. In that view of the matter, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents to ensure that the Standing Screening Committee take a decision on the petitioner’s application positively within a period of eight weeks from today. Ordinarily, no extension of time would be granted.

¶24

6. In case the petitioner is found unsuitable for appointment, the respondent would give reasons for the decision and communicate it to the petitioner.

¶25

7. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶26

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

¶27

AJAY DIGPAUL, J.

¶28

JULY 4, 2025 /sk

¶29

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶30

Signature Not Verified