AMIT KUMAR VERMA & ORS. vs UNION OF INDIA

$~56
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 11.02.2025
+ W.P.(C) 1650/2025
AMIT KUMAR VERMA & ORS.
…..Petitioners
Through: Mr.Mandeep Baisala & Mr.Yashpal Yadav, Advs

versus

UNION OF INDIA
…..Respondent
Through: Mr.Mimansak Bhardwaj, SPC with Mr.Shubhashish Roy, Ms.Vidya Mishra, Advs. & Mr.Ankur, GP along with Mr.A.M. Balashed, AC/CISF, Mr.Atul, Mr.Prahlad, Mr.Amit, SI/CISF.

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR
NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 8011/2025
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
CM APPL. 8012/2025
3. This is an application seeking permission to file a lengthy synopsis and list of dates.
4. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed.
5. The application is disposed of.
W.P.(C) 1650/2025
6. This petition has been filed by the petitioners, praying for the following relief:
“A direction to the Standing Screening Committee of the Respondent/CISF at CISF Headquarters, New Delhi to decide the correctness/antecedents of the documents produced by petitioners no.1 to 10, showing proof in support of the fact that no case/FIR is pending against them, within two weeks, as no cases, whatsoever, are pending against the petitioners herein.”

7. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners had applied for the post of Constable (General Duty). By a communication dated 23.01.2025, it has been informed to the petitioners that his case has been referred to the Standing Screening Committee on the ground that he was found to be involved in a criminal case before joining the Central Industrial Security Force.
8. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent has failed to appreciate that the petitioners already stands acquitted of the said criminal case and there is no other criminal case pending against the petitioners.
9. The petitioners have filed the present petition as the delay in taking a decision by the Standing Screening Committee may cause further complications in the service profile of the petitioners, if the petitioners are eventually to be appointed.
10. Issue notice.
11. Notice is accepted by the learned counsel for the respondents, who submits that the petitioners have not submitted any documents in support of his above assertion.
12. Without in any manner expressing any opinion on the merits of the petition or the claim of the petitioners, as we agree that any delay in taking a final decision by the Standing Screening Committee can lead to further complications in the service profile not only of the petitioners but also of his other batch mates, we direct the Standing Screening Committee to consider the case of the petitioners within a period of four weeks from today and pass a speaking order. The decision thereof be communicated to the petitioners within a period of one week thereafter. If the decision of the respondent/Standing Screening Committee is against the interest of the petitioners, it shall be open to the petitioners to challenge the same in accordance with law.
13. The petition is disposed of with the above directions.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J

SHALINDER KAUR, J
FEBRUARY 11, 2025/rv
Click here to check corrigendum, if any

W.P.(C) 1650/2025 Page 1 of 3