Disposed

Sumeet Kumar v. Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection Commission

Himachal Pradesh HC1 Jun 2017CWP/636/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the High Court provided directions to the Administrative Tribunal concerning a challenge to a surveyor recruitment process. The Court ordered that the petitioner's eligibility be considered first, results for others declared while keeping the petitioner's sealed, and appointments made subject to the main petition's outcome.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to Tribunal: consider petitioner's eligibility first; declare results for others but keep petitioner's sealed; make appointments subject to main petition outcome.

Sumeet Kumar Vs Himachal Prade… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Himachal Pradesh HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.636/2017 Date of decision : 01.06.2017

¶3

Sumeet Kumar … Petitioner Versus Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection Commission …Respondent

¶4

Coram:

¶5

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.

¶6

Whether approved for reporting?¹ No.

¶7

For the Petitioner : Mr. Yogesh Kumar Chandel, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Archana Dutt, Advocate.

¶8

Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice (Oral)

¶9

In this petition, petitioner lays challenge to the following interim order dated 15.3.2017, passed by the Ld. H.P. Administrative Tribunal, Shimla, in O.A. No.788 of 2017, titled as Sumeet Kumar vs. Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection Commission , Hamirpur :-

¶10

“Present: Mr. Yogesh Kumar Chandel, Advocate for the applicant.

¶11

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶12

…2…

¶13

Ms. Archana Dutt, Advocate for the respondent.

¶14

Heard. Notice.

¶15

Ms. Archana Dutt, learned Standing Counsel waives service of notice on behalf of the sole respondent.

¶16

Reply be filed within four weeks.

¶17

Prayer for interim relief cannot be considered at this stage as the interview for the post in question, is already over.

¶18

However, selection/

¶19

appointment to the post of Surveyor shall be subject to the final outcome of the original application.

¶20

List on 26.04.2017.

¶21

Copy Dasti.”

¶22

Mr. Romesh Verma, learned Additional Advocate General states that process for filling up 110 posts of Surveyor, by way of direct recruitment, already stands initiated by the

¶23

…3…

¶24

Commission, in fact almost completed, save and except that only result is to be declared and consequential action taken thereafter.

¶25

Keeping in view the interest of justice

¶26

as also parties, we dispose of the present petition, with the follo wing directions:-

¶27

(i) As to whether petitioner is otherwise eligible for the post in question or not, we are of the considered view that at the first instance, such fact ought to and should be considered by the Tribunal. Ordered accordingly.

¶28

(ii) Parties shall appear before the Tribunal on 13.6.2017, when a date shall be fixed for hearing the petition on merit.

¶29

(iii) We request the Ld. Tribunal to expeditiously dispose of the main petition and preferably within a period of two months. (iv) It shall be open for the respondents to declare the result of all candidates, save and

¶30

…4…

¶31

except, that of the petitioner, whose result shall be kept in a sealed cover and make appointments, in accordance with law. However, it be clarified in the letters of appointment that appointment(s) made, if any, shall be subject to the outcome of the petition in the original application as also any subsequent proceedings initiated there upon. (v) Needless to add, the Ld. Tribunal shall decide the issue uninfluenced of any observations made by this Court in our interim order reproduced supra.

¶32

Pending application(s), if any, also

¶33

stand disposed of.

¶34

Copy Dasti.

¶35

(Sanjay Karol), Acting Chief Justice.

¶36

June 1, 2017 (K S)

¶37

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge.

Sumeet Kumar v. Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumeet Kumar v. Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection Commission

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

Kamla Devi Vs State of Hp

Nischint Sharma Vs Prabodh Saxena and Others

Csk Hpkvv Vs B.L.Dhiman

Surender Pal Vs Himachal Pradesh Power Corporation

The State of H.P. Vs Shiv Raj Sigh

Solan District Truck Operators Cooperative Society Ltd. Vs Harjinder Singh