Sunita & Ors. v. Ministry of Defence & Anr.

1. Issue notice.

2. • Mr. Vil<Tam Jetly, learned Standing Counsel for Union of India accepts notice on behalf of respondent no.l. Mr. Sunil Satyarthi, learned Standing Counsel for Delhi Cantonment Board accepts notice on behalfof respondent no.2.

3. The petitioners are working with respondent no.2 as Data Entry Operators on contractual basis. The date of their joining W.P.(C) 2576/2015 Page!of[4], /' 2015:DHC:11357 respondent no.2 ranges from 2007 to 2012 as mentioned in para 2 ofthe writ petition.

4. In November, 2014, respondent no.2 advertised 11 posts of Junior Clerk on regular basis. The main grievance of the petitioners is that the advertisements provide the age limit of 18 to 25 years whereas there are no Recruitment Rules of the Cantomnent Board and DOPT Guidelines provide age of 18 to 27 years for the said posts. The petitioners be also claim age relaxation and benefit of past service. That apart, the advertisement was published in three daily newspapers and there is some discrepancy with respect to the eligibility criteria in the three advertisements.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that if the age of 27 years is taken and the past service is taken into consideration, all the petitioners would be ehgible for the post of Junior Clerk. It is submitted that petitioners no.l to 5, 7 and 10 applied for the post of Junior Clerk out of which onlypetitioners no.2, 4, 5, 7 and 10have received the roll number for the examination. The petitioners are seeking the stay of the examination scheduled to be held on 15'*^ March, 2015.

6. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent no.2 submits that the Delhi Cantonment Board has today taken a decision to postpone the written test to be held on 15^^ March, 2015 on administrative grounds. The copy of the public notice to be issued by Delhi Cantonment Board has been handed over and is taken on record. W.P.(C) 2576/2015 Page 2 of[4]

7. In view of the postponement of the written test scheduled to be held on March, 2015, CM 4600/2015 has become infructuous and is disposed of as such.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since respondent no.2 has on its own decided topostpone the written test, this writ petition may be treated, as a representation of the petitioners to be considered by the Delhi Cantonment Board before conducting the fresh written test.

9. Learned standing counsel for respondent no.2 submits that since the examination has already been postponed, there is no impediment in the consideration of the representation of the petitioners by the Delhi Cantonment Board.

10. In the facts and circumstanccs of this case, this writ petition shall be treated as a representation of the petitioners which shall be placed before the Delhi Cantomnent Board before fixing the fresh date of written test. A senior officer of the Ministry of Defence to be nominated by the Secretary, Ministry of Defence who shall remain present in the Board meeting at the time of consideration of the representation of the petitioners' The Board shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The petitioners present in ^ Court submit that their counsel present in Court today would represent them before the Board. In that view of the matter, the date of intimation of the Board meeting shall be communicated to Ms. Sripama Chatterjee, learned counsel for the petitioners. The decision of the Board shall be communicated to the petitioners thi-ough their counsel present in Court today. No coercive action W.P.{C) 2576/2015 Page[3] of 4 be taken against the petitioners in the meantime.

11. The writ petition is disposed ofibthe above terms. Needless to say that the petitioners shall be at liberty to avail all remedies available in law in the event of their representation bemg rejected ! by the Board.

12. Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the parties underthe signature of the CourtMaster.

MARCH 13,2015 dk W.P.(C) 2576/2015 J.R. MIDHA,J