Wed. Apr 21st, 2021

Din Dayal Gupta vs Union Of India & Ors. on 19 May, 2017

2 min read

Invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, the petitioner-Din Dayal Gupta, seeks issuance of a

writ of mandamus for being appointed Inspector (Prosecution) in

pursuance of the employment notification no. 1/2009 dated 14.11.2009 in

short ‘the subject notification’.

WP(C) 7700/2015 Page 1 of 8
2. It is the case of the petitioner that vide ‘the subject notification’, the

respondents had invited applications for filling up the posts of Inspector

(Prosecution) and Sub-Inspector (Prosecution) from male, female and ex-

servicemen as against Unreserved/General, Other Backward Classes,

Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes categories (OBC, SC and ST) as per

the criterion prescribed therein, and, the total number of vacancies

prescribed was 58, which vacancies were provisional and were subject to

increase or decrease at the time of recruitment, depending upon the

requirement of the railway administration. It was also stipulated that the

candidates would be liable to serve anywhere in India in Railway

Protection Force and may be allocated to any Zonal Railway after

selection. Petitioner, who was an OBC candidate, and, met the eligibility

criterion, appeared for the written examination after qualifying the

physical test. Having been declared successful in the written examination,

he also appeared for the viva-voce examination. The final result was

published in the third week of August, 2011. It is stated that though the

final result came to be published, but, it came to be published suppressing

the merit list. WP(C) 1769/2012 titled Anil Kumar Patel & Ors. vs. Union

of India & Anr. was filed by few of the candidates including the petitioner,

WP(C) 7700/2015 Page 2 of 8
seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus to the respondents to consider the

case of the petitioners, if, it was found that the petitioners were not

selected due to a fault in the selection process etc. In the counter affidavit

filed, the respondents stated that though the said petitioners had secured

the mandatory requirement of 60% marks in the written test and viva-

voce, but, could not qualify in the final list, as the candidates securing

marks over and above them, were selected. Details of the marks secured

by the said petitioners was disclosed in the said counter affidavit. The

counter affidavit also stated that the vacancies notified for the females

could only be filled up as under :

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply