Main Search Premium Members Advanced Search Disclaimer
User Queries
Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.
Delhi High Court
Sunil Kumar vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors. on 28 April, 2011
Author: Anil Kumar

                      WRIT PETITION (C) NO.12986/2009

                      Date of decision: 28th April, 2011

SUNIL KUMAR                                                ....Petitioner

                      Through:        Mr. Anil Singhal, Advocate.


GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS.                             ....Respondents

                      Through:        Mr. Gautam Gupta with
                                      Mr. Aditya, Advocates.


1.     Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see
       the judgment? No
2.     To be referred to the reporter or not?    No
3.     Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No


1.            Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the judgment

of   the   Division    Bench     of    this   Court   in    Writ   Petition   (C)

No.12940/2009, titled as Jitender Singh Vs. Government of N.C.T. of

Delhi and Others, dated 15th October, 2010. This writ petition was

filed by Mr. Jitender Singh who had successfully cleared the

WP(C) No12986/2009                                                              Page 1 of 4
 examination process for being recruited as a Constable in the Delhi

Police but was denied appointment on account of his being accused

in   some    FIRs,   although     he   was   acquitted    in   all    of   them.

2.            Notwithstanding the acquittal, the department had not

issued the letter of appointment entailing challenging his non-

appointment by Jitender Singh in O.A. No. 2543/06 filed before the

Tribunal which was dismissed. Against dismissal of his petition, the

Writ Petition (C) No.12940/2009 was filed which was allowed by

another Bench of this Court holding that no specific findings had

been    rendered     pertaining   to   Jitender   Singh    and       under   the

circumstances, the order in the case of Jitender Singh in his O.A. No.

2543/06 dated 24th April, 2008 was set aside and the OA No.

2543/2006 was restored for afresh adjudication on merits.

3.            Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the case

of the present petitioner Sunil Kumar is exactly the same. The

petitioner Sunil Kumar was also involved in a FIR, though he was

acquitted but even after successfully completing the selection

process for recruitment to the post of Constable in the Delhi Police,

he was not appointed to the said post entailing challenging the

action of the respondents before the Tribunal. The Tribunal,

however, had dismissed the original application of the petitioner

being O.A. No. 2579/2006 titled Sunil Kumar Vs. Govt. of NCT of

WP(C) No12986/2009                                                             Page 2 of 4
 Delhi and Others. While dismissing his petition, no specific findings

had been rendered in case of the petitioner except listing his name in

the chart, which was prepared for various candidates by the


4.            Learned counsel for the respondent, on instructions does

not oppose the pleas and contentions raised by the petitioner that no

findings were rendered by the Central Administrative Tribunal except

listing the name of the petitioner on the chart, which was prepared

by the Tribunal.

5.            Consequently, the impugned order dated 24th April,

2008 dismissing O.A. No.2579/2006 titled as Sunil Kumar Vs. Govt.

of   NCT of Delhi is set aside and the matter is remanded to the

Tribunal for fresh adjudication on merits and O.A. No.2579/2006 is


6.            Parties are left to bear their own costs.

7.            Since the parties are represented before us, we direct

that the parties shall appear through their counsel before the

Registrar of the Tribunal on 13th May, 2011.         Parties   shall   also

file a formal application along with a copy of the order passed by this

Court today so that the file could be traced by the Registry on 13th

May, 2011.

WP(C) No12986/2009                                                        Page 3 of 4
 8.            The writ petition is thus disposed of in these terms.

9.            Dasti.

                                    ANIL KUMAR, J.

SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J. APRIL 28, 2011 j WP(C) No12986/2009 Page 4 of 4