Victim Has Locus To Request Court To Summon Witnesses Under Section 311 CrPC In State Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Order 2 Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Ground to Reject a Plaint: Supreme Court Draws Crucial Distinction Between Bar to Sue and Bar by Law No Right to Lawyer Before Advisory Board in Preventive Detention — Unless Government Appears Through Legal Practitioner: Supreme Court Wife's Dowry Statement Cannot Be Used to Prosecute Her for 'Giving' Dowry: Supreme Court Upholds Section 7(3) Shield Husband's Loan Repayments Cannot Reduce Wife's Maintenance: Supreme Court Raises Amount to ₹25,000 From ₹15,000 Prisoners Don't Surrender Their Rights at the Prison Gate: Supreme Court Issues Binding SOP to End Delays in Legal Aid Appeals A Judgment Must Be a Self-Contained Document Even When Defendant Never Appears: Supreme Court on Ex Parte Decrees Court Cannot Dismiss Ex Parte Suit on Unpleaded, Unframed Issue: Supreme Court Sets Aside Specific Performance Decree Denied on Title Erroneous High Court Observations Cannot Be Used to Stake Property Claims: Supreme Court Steps In to Prevent Misuse of Judicial Observations No Criminal Proceedings Would Have Been Initiated Had Financial Settlement Succeeded: Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail In Rape Case Directors Cannot Escape Pollution Law Prosecution by Claiming Ignorance: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Summons Against Company Directors Order 7 Rule 11 CPC | Court Cannot Peek Into Defence While Rejecting Plaint: Delhi High Court Death 3½ Months After Accident Doesn't Break Causal Link If Doctors Testify Injuries Could Cause Death: Andhra Pradesh High Court LLB Intern Posed as Supreme Court Advocate, Used Fake Bar Council Card and Police Station Seals to Defraud Victims of Rs. 80 Lakhs: Gujarat High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail Husband Who Travels to Wife's City on Leave, Cohabits With Her, Then Claims She 'Never Lived With Him' Cannot Prove Cruelty: Jharkhand High Court Liquor Licence Is a State Privilege, Not a Citizen's Right — No Vested Right of Renewal Survives a Change in Rules: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Stay on E-Auction Policy Court Holiday Cannot Save Prosecution From Default Bail: MP High Court No Search At Your Premises, No Incriminating Document, No Case: Rajasthan HC Quashes Rs. 18 Crore Tax Assessment Under Section 153C Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court

No Age Relaxation for Delhi Police Constable Aspirants: High Court Upholds Tribunal’s Decision

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court today upheld the Central Administrative Tribunal’s decision, denying interim relief for age relaxation to candidates who became over-aged due to the non-conduct of the Constable (Executive) recruitment examination by Delhi Police in the years 2021 and 2022. The bench comprising Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta dismissed the petitions challenging the Tribunal’s order.

“We are of the view that in the peculiar facts of this case, no interim order can be granted,” Justice V. Kameswar Rao stated, emphasizing the court’s stance against modifying the recruitment process in light of the petitioners’ requests.

The petitioners had sought relief based on the premise that the recruitment process’s delay, attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic, had inadvertently caused them to surpass the age eligibility criteria. Despite empathetic arguments highlighting the unprecedented impact of the pandemic on recruitment schedules, the High Court observed that any concession would disrupt the established selection procedure.

“It will create a separate category/class of applicants with vested right for age relaxation which is not the intention of the framers of the Recruitment Rules,” the court noted, acknowledging the potential for widespread implications had the relaxation been granted.

The High Court’s decision comes as a reminder of the strict adherence to recruitment rules, even amidst the petitioners’ citing of several precedents where age relaxation had been granted under extraordinary circumstances. The bench clarified that such measures were case-specific and could not be generalized.

The judgment has significant implications for thousands of aspirants who had pinned their hopes on the judiciary to intervene in a matter that has been a point of contention since the pandemic disrupted recruitment calendars across the nation. With this ruling, the examination for the post of Constable (Executive) in Delhi Police is set to proceed as scheduled, without concessions for those who have aged out of the eligibility criteria.

 Date of Decision: November 07, 2023

AMANT KUMAR AND ORS VS  THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ORS.   

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Del-07-Nov-2023-Amanat-Vs-Commr-Police.pdf"]

Latest Legal News