Tue. Nov 24th, 2020

Arun Kumar vs Airport Authority Of India And Anr on 27 April, 2018

1 min read

1. For the relief claimed in this petition, a Representation (Annexure
P-3), though dated 31st March, 2018, was made by petitioner on 2nd April,
2018, as claimed by petitioner’s counsel. The grievance of petitioner is
that when he had requested the concerned staff to show the record of his
timing of 100 meters race, he was bluntly told that no such display or
record was maintained. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the
fate of Representation (Annexure P-3) is not yet known.
2. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that the
Representation (Annexure P-3) would be responded to by passing a
speaking order thereon, if not already done, and the display or record of
W.P.(C) 4354/2018 Page 1 of 2
petitioner’s timing of 100 meters race would be shown to petitioner. In
the call letter (Annexure P-2), it is clarified that 100 meters running is
required to be completed in 15 seconds, failing which, such candidates
will be disqualified. Petitioner’s counsel submits that such a pre-condition
is arbitrary and against the criteria as indicated in Annexure P-2. It is
pointed out that the Physical Endurance Test consists of five steps and
each step is of 20 marks and out of the total 100 marks, the minimum
passing marks are 60 and if any candidate is disqualified at the first step,
then the purpose of achieving minimum pass marks of 60 is defeated.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply