Staff Selection Commission v. Balkar Mor

(47) + W.P.(C) 11961/2023 & CM APPLs. 46901-46902/2023 STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION AND ORS...... Petitioners Through: Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel GNCTD (Services) with Mrs. Taniya Ahlawat, Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh, Ms. Laavanya Kaushik, Ms. Aliza Alam and Mr. Mohnish Sehrawat, Advs.

VERSUS

BALKAR MOR AND ORS...... Respondents Through: Mr. Subodh Kr. Pathak, Mr. Vinod Soni and Mr. Akash Swami, Advs. AND (49) + W.P.(C) 11975/2023 & CM APPLs. 46950-46951/2023 STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION AND ORS...... Petitioners Through: Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel GNCTD (Services) with Mrs. Taniya Ahlawat, Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh, Ms. Laavanya Kaushik, Ms. Aliza Alam and Mr. Mohnish Sehrawat, Advs.

VERSUS

RITIK CHAHAL AND ORS...... Respondents Through: Mr. Subodh Kr. Pathak, Mr. Vinod Soni and Mr. Akash Swami, Advs. W.P.(C) 11961/2023 and connected matter Page 2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR.

JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MR.

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J. (ORAL)

CM APPL. 46902/2023 in W.P.(C) 11961/2023 CM APPL. 46951/2023 in W.P.(C) 11975/2023 Exemptions allowed subject to all just exceptions. Applications stand disposed of. W.P.(C) 11961/2023 W.P.(C) 11975/2023

1. The challenge in these petitions is to an order dated July 7, 2023 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (‘Tribunal’, for short) in a batch of OAs. While considering the interim prayer made by the respondents herein, the Tribunal has in Para 6 directed as under:

2. The submission of Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, learned Standing Counsel for GNCTD (Services) is that the Tribunal could not have W.P.(C) 11961/2023 and connected matter Page 3 directed the constitution of a High Power Committee when FIR has been filed against the respondents herein, investigation has been carried out and challans have been filed before the concerned Court. According to her, in effect, the Tribunal has created a parallel Committee for carrying out the investigation, which is impermissible. She submits, as FIR is pending consideration, appointments cannot be given to the respondents. She seeks the prayers as made in the writ petitions, by setting aside the order dated July 7, 2023.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents, who appears on advance notice justify the order of the Tribunal by stating that even in the past, the Staff Selection Commission (‘SSC’, for short) through an in-house inquiry has cleared 135 candidates for appointment. So parity need to be given to the respondents.

4. We are unable to agree with the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents inasmuch as the Committee of which reference has been made by the counsel for the respondents was constituted to look into 625 cases, out of which 135 cases / candidates have been cleared but the Committee observed to initiate criminal action against the rest. It is pursuant thereto that general FIR has been registered against 490 candidates and challans filed in the concerned Criminal Court which is seized of the issue. Under such circumstances, the Tribunal could not have directed constitution of a High Power Committee to look into the cases of the respondents, as that shall mean a parallel Committee has been constituted to carry out investigation / inquiry, which has already been carried out / done by the police. Moreover, the FIR has been registered on the asking of the W.P.(C) 11961/2023 and connected matter Page 4 Committee constituted by the SSC, so no further Committee could have been constituted.

5. Accordingly, we set aside the order dated July 7, 2023 passed by the Tribunal.