Sanjeetyadav v. Union of India and Anr.

Delhi High Court · 30 Nov 2017 · 2017:DHC:8633-DB
Hima Kohli; Rekha Palli
W.P.(C) 10603/2017 & connected matters
2017:DHC:8633-DB
administrative petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed petitions challenging examination conditions due to the petitioners' failure to lodge timely protest, rendering their claims belated and not entertainable.

Full Text
Translation output
$-48, 60, 64, 68 & 72 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 10603/2017 &CM APPL. Nos.43420-421/2017
SANJEETYADAV .....Petitioner
Through: Mr.Pallav Kumar, Adv.
VERSUS
UNIONOFINDIAANDANR. Respondents
Through; Ms. Archana Gaur aiid Ms.Ridhima Gaur, Advocate.
W.P.(C) 10650/2017 &CM APPL. Nos.43617-618/2017
NILESH KUMAR SAINI Petitioner
Through: Mr. Pallav Kumar, Adv.
VERSUS
UNION OFINDIA AND ANR. Respondents
Through: Ms. Archana Gaur and Ms.Ridhima Gaur, Advocate.
W.P.(C) 10660/2017 &CM APPL. Nos.43634-635/2017
MUKESHKUMAR Petitioner
VERSUS
UNION OFINDIA AND ANR. Respondents
Through: Ms.Archana Gaur, Advocate.
W.P.(C) 10664/2017 &CM APPL. Nos.43642-643/2017
DEVENDER KUMAR Petitioner
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. Respondents
Through: Ms. Archana Gaur, Advocate.
W.P.C.10640/2017 & CM. No. 43589/2017 and 43592/2017
ABHISHEK Petitioner
Through: Mr, PallavKumar, Adv.
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. Respondents
Through: Ms. Archana Gaur, Advocate.
W.P.(C) 10603/2017&connected matters Page 1 of2
2017:DHC:8633-DB
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI
ORDER o/o 30.11.2017
JUDGMENT

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners fairly states that he does not wish to press the present petitions in light ofthe view expressed by this Bench in two earlier petitions seeking the same relief, i.e. W.P.(C) No.10507/2017 and W.P.(C) No.10509/2017 that were dismissed vide order dated 27.11.2017.

2. We may note that the aforesaid two petitions were dismissed by holding that the petitioners therein having failed to lodge any protest with the respondent No.2/BSF on the date ofthe examination itself or within a reasonable time therefrom with regard to their grievance that they were not permitted to use their own key-board and mouse in the examination, their clairns were highly belated and could not beentertained.

3. Accordingly, the present petitions are dismissed as not pressed along with the pending applications.