Allowed

Chandra Prakash v. Airports Authority of India and Ors.

Delhi HC11 Aug 2025LPA/514/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Delhi allowed an appeal filed by a candidate challenging the appointment process for a Junior Assistant post, suggesting he file a review petition instead to raise an unstated point regarding missing justification for mark allocation. The Court granted liberty to withdraw the appeal and file a review.

What did the court decide?

Leave and liberty granted to withdraw the appeal with liberty to file a Review Petition. Appeal disposed of.

Chandra Prakash Vs Airports Authority of India and Ors. — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~43

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- LPA 514/2025

¶4

CHANDRA PRAKASH .....Appellant

¶5

Through: Mr. Ankur Chibber, Adv.

¶6

versus

¶7

AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents Through:

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 11.08.2025 CM APPL. 48964/2025 (Exemption)

¶12

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶13

LPA 514/2025, CM APPL. 48962/2025, CM APPL. 48963/2025, CM APPL. 48965/2025

¶14

The present Appeal is directed against the Order dated 20.05.2025, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(C) No.642/2019, dismissing the Writ Petition filed by the Appellant herein seeking a direction to the Respondents herein for appointment of the Appellant to the Post of Junior Assistant (Fire Services), AAI, in terms of the Advertisement issued by the AAI in August, 2017.

¶15

Learned Counsel for the Appellant states that as per the advertisement, if a candidate completes the task of full ladder climbing within 35 seconds, he is to be awarded full 20 marks for the said task. He states that the Appellant has completed the said task in 35 seconds and, therefore, the Petitioner ought to have been given full 20 marks instead of 19 marks. Learned Counsel for the Appellant draws the attention of this Court

¶16

This is a digitally signed order.

¶17

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 19/08/2025 at 13:41:39

¶18

to the reasons given by the Respondent vide Order dated 19.12.2018 wherein no justification has been given by the AAI as to why the Appellant has been awarded 19 marks instead of 20 marks. Learned Counsel for the Appellant states that this is extremely crucial because if the Appellant would have been awarded full 20 marks, he would be entitled to be appointed for the post of Junior Assistant (Fire Services), AAI. He states that the learned Single Judge has not adverted to on this aspect while passing the Order dated 20.05.2025.

¶19

This Court suggested that since this point has not been adverted to by the learned Single Judge, in the fitness of things, it would be more appropriate for the Appellant to approach the learned Single Judge by filing a Review Petition. The learned Counsel for the Appellant accepts the suggestion of this Court and seeks permission to withdraw the present Appeal with liberty to file a Review Petition.

¶20

Leave and liberty, as prayed for, is granted.

¶21

The Appeal is disposed of, along with the pending applications, if any.

¶22

It is made clear that this Court has not made any observations on points urged by the learned Counsel for the Appellant.

¶23

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J

¶24

SAURABH BANERJEE, J

¶25

AUGUST 11, 2025 Rahul

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

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 19/08/2025 at 13:41:39

Chandra Prakash v. Airports Authority of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra Prakash v. Airports Authority 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

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs Ashok Kumar

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs Dheer Singh

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs Sh Ram Kishan

Badan Singh Vs Director General, Indo Tibetan Border Police Force & Ors.

Prahlad Arya Vs Prudence School Dwarka and Ors.

The Management of Patel Integrated Logistics Limited Vs Satbir Singh & Anr.