Full Text
W.P.(C) 8473/2016
MADHURI SHARMA & ORS. Petitioners
Through: Mr. Raman Kapur, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rajeev Kumar Tiwari, Advocate.
Through:
DEEPIKA DEWAN & ANR
Through:
Through:
W.P.(C) No.8473/2016 & conn, matters Respondents
Mr. Amit Bansal, Advocate with Ms. Seema Dolo, Advocate for respondent
No.l.
Ms. Beenashaw N. Soni, Advocate for respondent No.2.
Ms. Prabhsahay Kaur, ASC with Ms. Shilpa Dewan, Advocate for respondent No.3.
Mr. A.K. Thakur, Advocate for applicant in C.M. No.6408/2017.
Petitioners Mr. Raman Kapur, Senior Advocate Advocate.
No.l. page 1 of5 2017:DHC:9015
SUNITA & ORS
Through:
Through:
Petitioners Mr. Raman Kapur, Senior Advocate Advocate.
No.l.
Mr. Arun Kumar Panwar, Advocate for respondent No.3.
22.02.2017 C.M. Nos.6408/2017(for condonation of delay) in W.P.fQ No.8473/2016
C.M. No.6370/2017 (for condonation of delay) in W.P.(C)
No.10455/2016 C.M. No.6371/2017 (for condonation of delay) in W.P.(C)
No.10454/2016
ORDER
1. These applications are allowed and delay in filing the additional affidavits by the petitioners is condoned and the additional affidavits filed W.P.(C) No.8473/2016 & conn, matters page 2 of[5] •ji. / ^ pursuant to the order dated 20.12.2016 are taken on record. C.M.s stand disposed of. +W.P.(a Nos.8473/2016,10455/2016 & 10454/2016
1. By these writ petitions, petitioners seek the relief that the respondent no.2/college should publish the result of the interviews held on 9/11.1.2016 and 20/21/22/23.1.2016 for making of appointments to the posts of Assistant Professor in the respondent no.2/college.
2. On 20.12.2016, a detailed order was passed by this Court noticing that the issue arose of non-declaration of results of the interviews on account ofrespondent no.2/college not having a regular governing body.
3. Today, so far as the respondent no.2/college is concerned, as also the respondent no.1/University of Delhi, these two respondents have no quarrel with the petitioners as they do not dispute the constitution of the governing body of the respondent no.2/college so as to make appointments to the posts of Assistant Professor pursuant to the interviews held on 9/11.1.2016 and 20/21 /22/23.1.2016.
4. The only dispute could have been raised by the respondent no.3/Government ofNCT of Delhi and which is entitled to nominate persons W.P.(C) No.8473/2016 & conn, matters page 3 of[5] of the governing body of the respondent no.2/college and counsel for the respondent no.3 has placed on record a letter dated 25.11.2016 of the respondent no.3 stating that nomination for members of the governing body of 28 Delhi Government Sponsored Colleges including respondent no.2/college should thereafter take place i.e it is stated by the respondent no.3 that since in this case the governing body of the respondent no.2/college decided as per its minutes of meeting dated 15.7.2016, being prior in point of time to the letter dated 25.11.2016 of the respondent no.3, respondent no.3 accordingly does not challenge the entitlement of the governing body of the respondent no.2/college to take decision for appointments to the posts of Assistant Professor of the respondent no.2/college pursuant to the interviews conducted on 9/11.1.2016 and 20/21/22/23.1.2016.
5. In view of the above, these writ petitions are disposed of by directing the respondent no.2/college to publish the results ofthe recruitment process concluding with interviews which were held for the posts of Assistant Professor of the respondent no.2/college on 9/11.1.2016 and 20/21/22/23.1.2016. Needful be done by the respondent no.2/college within a period oftwo weeks from today. W.P.(C) No.8473/2016 & conn, matters page 4 of[5]
6. Writ petitions are accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid observations.