Naimuddin v. Union of India

Delhi High Court · 18 Dec 2025 · 2025:DHC:11605-DB
C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla
W.P.(C) 19151/2025
2025:DHC:11605-DB
administrative petition_allowed

AI Summary

The Court directed reconsideration of the petitioner’s candidature for Sub-Inspector appointment after acknowledging incomplete consideration of his qualification documents, disposing of the writ petition accordingly.

Full Text
Translation output
W.P.(C) 19151/2025
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 19151/2025, CM APPL. 79726/2025 & CM APPL.
79727/2025 NAIMUDDIN .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Setu Niket and Ms. Esha Mazumdar, Advs.
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Neeraj, SPC
WITH
Mr. Rudra Paliwal, GP and Mr. Soumyadeep, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA
ORDER (ORAL)
18.12.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
JUDGMENT

1. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that his name was not included in the final merit list for appointment to the post of Sub-Inspector (GD) under the Ex-Servicemen category.

2. The case of the petitioner is that as per his merit, he would have secured entry into the Central Armed Police Forces, as he has scored more than the last candidate who was appointed to the Central Industrial Security Force.

3. Mr. Rudra Paliwal, learned GP submits, on instructions, that, inadvertently, only one of the qualification documents of the petitioner W.P.(C) 19151/2025 was considered. He undertakes that the petitioner’s case would be reconsidered within three weeks, after taking all his documents into account and that, if he qualifies on merit and fulfils other criteria, his candidature would be further processed in accordance with law.

4. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

5. Needless to say, should the petitioner continue to remain aggrieved, he would be at liberty to re-approach this Court.

C. HARI SHANKAR, J

OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J DECEMBER 18, 2025