Office of the District Sessions Judge Headquarters, Delhi v. District and Sessions Courts Employees Welfare Association

Delhi High Court · 09 Jan 2024 · 2024:DHC:161-DB
Rajiv Shakdher; Amit Bansal
LPA 21/2024
2024:DHC:161-DB
administrative appeal_allowed Significant

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court set aside an interim order allowing disputed candidates to appear in a departmental examination, deferring the exam pending final adjudication of eligibility.

Full Text
Translation output
LPA 21/2024
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 09.01.2024
LPA 21/2024 and CM APPLs. 1049-50/2024
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT SESSIONS JUDGE HEADQUARTERS, DELHI AND ANR. ..... Appellants
Through: Ms Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel
WITH
Ms Tania Ahlawat, Mr
Nitesh K. Singh, Ms Laavanya Kaushik, Ms Aliza Alam and Mr
Mohnish Sehrawat, Advocates.
VERSUS
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURTS EMPLOYEES WELFARE
ASSOCIATION AND ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr Rajat Aneja
WITH
Ms Alka Dwivedi, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.: (ORAL)
CM APPL. 1050/2024
JUDGMENT

1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. LPA 21/2024 and CM APPL. 1049/2024 [Application filed on behalf of the appellants seeking interim relief]

2. This appeal is directed against an order dated 03.01.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge.

3. Via the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has permitted the members of the respondent association to sit for the limited departmental competitive examination that is scheduled to be held on 14.01.2024.

4. Via the examination, the appellants seek to fill up 233 posts in the rank of Senior Judicial Assistant.

5. Ms Avnish Ahlawat contends that the members of the respondent association do not fulfill the eligibility criterion. 5.[1] Concededly, the eligibility criterion for the applicants, as provided in the subject notification, is as follows:

┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                              Sl. No.       Name of the Post       Method of           Qualification Etc.      Appointing │
│                                                                  Recruitment                                  Authority  │
├──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                                  13      Senior        Judicial 50%       of     the For members of the District         │
│                                          Assistant.             vacant posts by Establishment            of Judge**      │
│                                          (Promotion/Selection   selection        on this             Court:              │
│                                          Post)                  merit           from Graduate with 5                     │
│                                          (Non-Gazetted) PB-II- Judicial              years service and                   │
│                                          9300-34800+4600/-*     Assistants       on non-graduate with                    │
│                                                                 the     basis     of 8 years service in                  │
│                                                                 written test and the         posts       of              │
│                                                                 Interview,           Judicial Assistants.                │
│                             *Revised PB-II-9300-34800+4800/-                                                             │
│                             **Now Principal District & Sessions Judge (HQs), Delhi                                       │
│                             6.        Mr Rajat Aneja, learned counsel, who appears on behalf of the                      │
│                             respondent/association, on the other hand, says that if notional service is                  │
│                             taken into account the members of the respondent association will fulfill the                │
│                             eligibility conditions. It is this aspect that is required to be adjudicated in              │
│ Signature Not Verified                                                                                                   │
│ Signed By:VIPIN KUMAR RAI        LPA 21/2024                                                                    Page 2 o │
│                             the pending writ petition.                                                                   │
│                             7.       Since the eligibility of a candidate who sits for an examination goes to            │
│                             the heart of the matter, according to us, an interim direction of the kind the               │
│                             learned Single Judge issued will not serve the interest of the parties. If an                │
│                             interim direction is issued, the court has to firstly, conclude that a prima                 │
│                             facie case is made out for a grant of relief. The other two tests, i.e., the                 │
│                             balance of convenience, and that irreparable damage will be caused if the                    │
│                             relief as sought is not granted, follow the establishment of a prima facie                   │
│                             case. The learned Single Judge has adverted only to “balance the equities”.                  │
│                             8.       Mr Aneja emphasizes that if the members of the respondent                           │
│                             association are unable to take the examination, then, the subject posts will be              │
│                             filled up, putting back their chance of being promoted by several years.                     │
│                             9.       Having regard to the contentions of the counsel for the parties, in our             │
│                             view, the best way forward would be to defer the examination for a short                     │
│                             period and request the learned Single Judge to dispose of the writ petition                  │
│                             one way or the other, at the earliest.                                                       │
│                             10.      Accordingly, we put this suggestion to Ms Ahlawat, who appears on                   │
│                             behalf of the appellants.                                                                    │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

11. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside only to enable final adjudication in the writ petition.

12. The learned Single Judge is requested to dispose of the writ petition on or before 05.02.2024.

13. Ms Ahlawat will take steps to inform the candidates about the deferment of the examination.

14. The writ petition will be listed before the learned Single Judge on 11.01.2024.

15. The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

16. Pending interlocutory applications shall also stand closed.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J AMIT BANSAL, J JANUARY 9, 2024 / tr