In a recent judgement by the Delhi High Court, age relaxation has been granted for deputation applications following a case involving the petitioner and respondent no. 3 & 4. The court addressed the unjust denial of the petitioner’s request for forwarding his application and the subsequent implications. This decision sets a precedent for similar cases in the future. Find out more about the details of the case and the impact of this ruling here.
Facts
- The petitioner joined as Assistant Executive Engineer (Civil) on 31.05.1994.
- He was promoted as Executive Engineer (Civil) on 10.05.2003.
- Further promoted to the rank of Superintending Engineer on 07.03.2018.
- Submitted application for deputation to the post of Executive Director (T/P) on 06.01.2022.
Arguments
- The petitioner, aged 56, was not considered for future deputation applications by the respondents.
- The application for deputation was recommended by the Chief Engineer with assurance of no adverse impact on current work.
- Petitioner participated in the interview without official approval, leading to a Court of Inquiry by respondent nos. 3 & 4.
- Petitioner was granted an extension for producing NOC but was refused by respondent nos. 3 & 4, leading to CoI.
- Petitioner’s counsel argues for quashing the decision of not forwarding the deputation application and for appointment against the available vacancy.
Analysis
- The rejection of the petitioner’s request by respondent nos. 3 & 4 for forwarding his application for deputation to respondent no. 6 was found to be unjustified.
- The petitioner, despite being deemed eligible to apply for deputation, had his request denied due to his role as the Inquiry Officer in pending Departmental Enquiries.
- The petitioner approached the Court in October 2022, well after the vacancy he had applied for had been allocated to the next candidate in the wait list panel.
- The Court noted that the employer should not obstruct the career advancement of a dedicated employee through arbitrary and unjustifiable grounds.
- While the petitioner’s request for NOC to join respondent no. 6 was wrongly denied, no relief could be granted at the belated stage due to the vacancy being filled and a new vacancy being advertised, which the petitioner did not apply for.
- The petitioner prays for age relaxation to be considered for future applications for deputation, despite exceeding the maximum age limit.
- The direction for age relaxation is issued based on the unique circumstances of the case.
- Historically, similar applications under exceptional circumstances have been positively considered by the authorities.
- The counsel for the respondents does not contest this claim.
Decision
- The writ petition is disposed along with all pending applications by directing Respondent No. 3 & 4 to consider granting age relaxation to the Petitioner for applying for deputation until 31.12.2024.
- All other reliefs sought in the petition are rejected.
- All interim orders are vacated.
Case Title: RAKESH CHOPRA Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. (2024:DHC:3736-DB)
Case Number: W.P.(C)-16645/2022
