Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

Provisional Inclusion in IAS Select List Justified; UPSC and State’s Decision Stands: Delhi High Court Dismisses Writ Petition in IAS Promotion Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court upheld the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT)’s order in the case involving Arun Kumar Singh’s promotion in the Indian Administrative Service. The Court, comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, dismissed the writ petition challenging CAT’s order that disposed of a contempt petition concerning the provisional inclusion of the petitioner’s name in the IAS Select List.

The central issue revolved around the challenge against CAT’s order, which addressed the petitioner’s promotion and provisional inclusion in the IAS Select List, based on the Indian Administrative Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955.

Petitioner Arun Kumar Singh filed a writ petition, contesting CAT’s order on the grounds that his provisional inclusion in the IAS Select List was unjustified. Singh’s contention stemmed from the argument that the departmental proceedings pending against him were not grounds to withhold his integrity certificate, thereby making his inclusion in the list provisional.

Review of Provisional Inclusion: The High Court scrutinized the petitioner’s contention alongside the regulations and directives of the Tribunal, taking into account responses from UPSC and the State Government regarding Singh’s integrity and the pending disciplinary proceedings.

Role of UPSC and State Government: The Court examined the Union Public Service Commission’s and the State Government’s roles in the decision-making process, particularly their response to chargesheet issuance before the notification of the select list.

Judicial Precedents: Referring to Supreme Court precedents in J.S. Parihar v. Ganpat Duggar and Prithawi Nath Ram v. State of Jharkhand, the Court clarified the scope of contempt proceedings in reviewing compliance with judicial orders.

The Delhi High Court concluded that no fault could be found with CAT’s order and upheld the petitioner’s liberty to seek remedy against UPSC’s order dated July 31, 2017. The writ petition and related applications were dismissed as infructuous.

 Date of Decision: April 09, 2024

Arun Kumar Singh Versus Union of India & Ors.

 

Latest Legal News