Disposed

Niranjan Singh and Ors. v. Union of India and Anr.

Rajasthan HC17 May 2018CW/6659/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble Court disposed of the writ petition with directions based on the precedent law set in Kashi Ram Vs. Union of India. The court ordered the Secretary, Staff Selection Commission to consider the petitioner's grievance, publish detailed candidate lists with marks, hold an inquiry, and pass a detailed speaking order within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent to consider grievance, publish candidate list with marks, conduct inquiry, grant hearing, and pass detailed speaking order within 30 days.

Niranjan Singh and Ors. Vs Union of India and Anr. — Intellectual Property | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6659 / 2018

¶3

Niranjan Singh S/o Shri Bhanwar Singh Rathore, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Somasi, Tehsil & District Churu (raj.)

¶4

Moher Singh Poonia S/o Shri Raju Ram Poonia, R/o Ward No. 2, Somesi, Tehsil & District Churu(raj.)

¶5

Gokul Chand S/o Shri Jagdish Poonia, R/o Ward No. 2, Somasi, Tehsil & District Churu, (raj.).

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

Union of India Staff Selection Commission Northern Regional, New Delhi.

¶9

Secretary Staff Selection Commission Northern Region, New Delhi.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Tanwar Singh Rathore

¶12

For Respondent(s) :

¶13

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶14

Order

¶15

17/05/2018

¶16

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall be satisfied if his representation is decided strictly in accordance with precedent law of this Hon’ble Court at Jaipur Bench in the matter of Kashi Ram Vs. Union of India & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition NO.2867/2016) . The relevant portion of this judgment reads as under :-

¶17

“Mr. R.D. Rastogi, ld. Additional Solicitor General, has submitted that to ensure purity and transparency in the matters of the recruitment so that merit remain the only criteria so far the recruitment to the public employment is concerned, Union of India, shall not shy away to take any action at its own end.

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

[CW-6659/2018]

¶20

Mr. R.D. Rastogi, ld. Additional Solicitor General, has assured this court that he himself shall intervene and ensure that the transparency is discernible and no wrong is committed by the officials so far recruitment is concerned.

¶21

Accepting the assurance given by Mr. R.D. Rastogi, ld. Additional Solicitor General, the present writ petitions are disposed of by issuing following directions:-

¶22

(a) That all petitioners shall appear before Secretary, Staff Selection Commission and they shall submit comprehensive detailed representation giving details of the candidates who being less meritorious have been appointed.

¶23

(b) That the petitioners in the representation to be filed shall be at liberty to demolish the arguments raised by the respondents that less meritorious persons because of belonging to border area or of being more in age or for any other reasons have been given appointment,

¶24

(c) The petitioners shall also be entitled to raise arguments that wrongly candidates from the State of Rajasthan were diverted to other States even they were less meritorious or qua meritorious persons route of diversion to the other state was not followed. Petitioners shall be also at liberty to ventilate any other grievance they have regarding the recruitment process undertaken by Regional Director, Staff Selection Commission, Northern Region. The Secretary, Staff Selection Commission, shall hold a fact finding inquiry into the allegations leveled against the officials who at the relevant time were posted in the Regional Directorate of Staff Selection Commission, Northern Region.

¶25

(d) Secretary, Staff Selection Commission, before decision of the representation shall publish a list of all candidates who appeared in the State of Rajasthan for the recruitment to the post of Constable(General Duty) in paramilitary forces in pursuance to impugned advertisement qua all the categories be it General, OBC, SC or ST. In the list so published marks secured by each candidate shall be depicted along with cut off marks, of the category to which candidate belong.

¶26

(e) In the list, so published, in pursuance of above directions the reasons shall be assigned as to why a

¶27

(3 of 3)

¶28

[CW-6659/2018]

¶29

particular candidate has been appointed even though he has secured less marks.

¶30

(f) After publication of the list Secretary, Staff Selection Commission shall afford hearing to the petitioners and shall pass a detailed reasoned speaking order within one month after the conclusion of the hearing.

¶31

The petitioners shall be at liberty to re- approach this court, in case, they are aggrieved against the order to be passed by the Secretary, Staff Selection Commission.”

¶32

In light of the aforesaid submission, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner’s grievance in light of the aforementioned order and pass a detail speaking order within a period of 30 days from today strictly in accordance with law.

¶33

(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI)J.

¶34

sudheer

Niranjan Singh and Ors. v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Niranjan Singh 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naresh Kumar Parmar and Ors. Vs State and Ors.

Basant Lal Katara and Ors. Vs State and Ors.

Smt. Jeena Vs Chief Manager P.N.B. Sgnr and Ors.

Hemendra Puri Vs J.N.v.University,Jodhpur and Ors.

Chhail Singh Vs State and Ors.

Ramesh Kumar Vs Ashok Kumar