W.P.(C)/134/2016 of NEETU Vs DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES & ORS
Parties
- Allowed subject to all just exceptions (PETITIONER)
- Ramesh Ram and Others (2010) 7SCC 234 and Ram Singh & Ors. v. Union of India (2015) 3 SCALE 570to submit that respondents are required to consider the case of petitionerunder the General Category (RESPONDENT)
Cites (1 resolved of 2 detected)
Statutes cited (6)
Full text
solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+W.P.(C) 134/2016
NEETU
..... Petitioner
Through:Mr. G.V. Rao and Mr. A.K.Upadhyay, Advocatesversus
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES & ORS
..... Respondents
Through:Dr. L.C. Singhi, Advocate forrespondent No.1-UOIMr. Arun Aggarwal, Advocate forrespondents No.2 & 3
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
O R R08.01.2016
CM APPLN.659/2016 (Exemption)
Allowed subject to all just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 134/2016 & CM APPLN.658/2016 (Stay)
Petitioner claims to have applied under the Other BackwardClasses (OBC) category for the post of Probationer Officer and wasofferedprovisionalappointmentasProbationerOfficerbytherespondent-Bank, which was withdrawn vide Communication of 21[st]August,2015(Annexure-IX).Respondent-Bank’simpugnedcommunication of 3[rd]November, 2015 (Annexure-XIV colly.) refuses toconsider petitioner’s case under the unreserved category without anyjustification.
In this petition, petitioner relies upon RTI information (Annexure-XI colly.) to submit that in view of quashing the Notification of 4[th]March,2014 by the Apex Court, the candidates under the OBC category of thisNotification have to be treated as one from General Category.
At the hearing, learned counsel for petitioner had placed relianceupon decisions in Union of India v. Ramesh Ram and Others (2010) 7SCC 234 and Ram Singh & Ors. v. Union of India (2015) 3 SCALE 570to submit that respondents are required to consider the case of petitionerunder the General Category.
In the facts and circumstances of this case, it is deemed appropriateto dispose of this writ petition with direction to respondent-Bank to treatthis writ petition as Representation and to decide it in the light of theUPSC’s communication (Annexure-XI colly.) and the precedents cited bypetitioner, within period of six weeks from today by passing speakingorder. The fate of the Representation be conveyed to petitioner within aweek thereafter, so that petitioner may avail of the remedies as availablein law.
Copy of this order be given dasti to both the sides.
JANUARY 08, 2016
(SUNIL GAUR)JUDGE