Writ Petition format challenging CAT Judgment in High Court

Format of Writ Petition to challenge Judgment/order of Central Administrative Tribunal.

SYNOPSIS

1. That the present Writ Petition under Article 226 read with 2___ of the Constitution of India is against the order dated ________ ________ ________ passed by the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, (hereinafter referred as 'Hon'ble Tribunal') in OA No. ________ of 20________ vide which the Hon'ble Tribunal has disposed of the OA on the basis of an interim order passed by this Hon'ble Court on________in Writ Petition (C) No. ________ of 20________ titled ___ & Ors ________& Ors.

2. That in the said Petition it was wrongly mentioned that Mr. ________, one of the Batch mates of the Petitioner, has done ___ course. In fact he has done ___ (the same course done by the Petitioner) from ___ and his candidature for the post of Primary teacher in ___ was rejected with a remark 'overage' without giving age relaxation as per the direction of this Hon'ble Court in ________and Ors Vs. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board, Writ Petition (Civil) No. ________ of ________ decided on ________. He had filed OA in the Hon'ble Tribunal challenging the rejection order. His OA and Petitions were allowed by the Hon'ble Tribunal, this Hon'ble Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court. But now the Respondents in W.P.(C) No. ________ of 20________ wrongly mentioned that he has done ___ course, due to which he got age relaxation. By considering this wrong information this Hon'ble Court granted stay in the above said Petition. The Hon'ble Tribunal, on the basis of the said stay order, disposed of the OA filed by the Petitioner.

3. That the said interim order dated ________in WPC No. ________ of ________ is contrary to the order dated ________passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.(C) ________/20________titled ________. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors, filed by other Petitioner in the combined order.

4. That the Hon'ble Tribunal while disposing of the OA failed to consider the fact that the above said Writ Petition was filed by concealing the fact that disputes regarding educational qualification was already settled by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated ________ ________ 20________ in ________Vs Delhi Subordinate Services Selection board W.P.(C) No. ________ of ________. The copy of the said order was in the file of the Hon'ble Tribunal, but without considering it and on the basis of wrong statement given by the respondents that Mr. ________had done ___ course, hence the Supreme Court allowed his review petition to give age relaxation as per ________and Others v. DSSSB, the Hon'ble tribunal disposed of the Original Application filed by the Petitioner with a remark that Judgments in ________ are in presonam and not in rem. In Para 10 of the order dated ________ ________ 20________, this Hon'ble court clearly mentioned that Mr. ________had done ___ note ___ course. In Para 12 of the said order this Hon'ble Court held that ___ and ___ course are similar, hence age relaxation should be provided to the persons who are identically placed in terms of educational qualification.

5. The Hon'ble Tribunal also failed the appreciate that Writ Petition No. ________ of 20________is barred by Res Judicata as all the disputes regarding educational qualification i.e. ___, ___ and equivalent courses had been settled by this Hon'ble Court in ________ (________) which was attained finality after the Hon'ble Supreme Court allowed the Review Petition No. ________ of 20________ filed by Mr. ________.

6. Brief facts about the case are that pursuant to the Advertisement No. ________/________ of Delhi ___, the petitioner had applied for the post of Primary Teacher in Municipal Corporation of Delhi (___) (Post Code ________/________) under OBC Category and appeared for Written Examination held on ________.20________. She had secured ________marks (cut off mark for OBC 69) but her candidature was not considered for the said Post and her name was displayed in the rejection list published on ________.20________ with a remark of "overage".

7. That another group of Petitioners from the batch of Mr. ________, whose names were appeared in the rejection order with a remark "overage" had also filed OA No. ________ of 20________ in ________& Ors V. Govt. of NCT of Delhi with the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, seeking direction to grant age relaxation as per ________ (________) Judgment to them. The Hon'ble Tribunal had allowed their OA No. ________ of 20________vide its order dated ________. But the Respondents neither gave age relaxation to them nor challenged the said order. Applicants in the above said OA No. ________ of 20________ had filed contempt Petition No. ________/20________ with the Hon'ble Tribunal. Vide order dated ________the Hon'ble Tribunal directed compliance of the Judgment dated ________, failing which the Chairman of the Respondent No.2/DSSSB has been directed to remain present on the next date. With these directions the matter has been re-notified for ________.20________.

8. That after a delay of almost ________years, the Respondents have filed Writ Petition (C) No. ________ of 20________ titled Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors Vs ________& Ors and challenged order dated ________.20________ in OA NO. ________ of 20________ along with order dated ________.20________ in Contempt Petition No. ________/20________6. On ________.20________ this Hon'ble Court issued notice in the said Writ Petition and stayed operation of Judgment dated ________.20________.

LIST OF DATES AND EVENTS
___________ Prior to __________ Maximum age limit for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher ___ were __ years for male and __ Years for Female.

__________ Respondent No. 1 issued a notification and amended Recruitment rules for appointment to the post of Assistant Teachers in NCT of Delhi and ___ and prescribed the maximum age limit as ___ years for male as well as females.

__________ Some candidates who were doing ___ course had challenged the above said notification in this Hon'ble Court vide Writ Petition (C) No. ________of 20________titled ________ & Ors V. Delhi Subordinate Selection Board & Ors. This Hon'ble Court directed that the respondents would permit all those who have completed the ___ course either in the year 2006 or 2007 or 2008 to appear in examination conducted by the Respondents for the post of Assistant Teachers once each of the respondents i.e. ___ and Govt. of NCT of Delhi.

________ Respondent No. 2 issued advertisement No. ________/20________ for the post Teacher (primary) in ___ under the Post Code ________/________. The Petitioners applied.

________ The Cut off date has been fixed by the Respondents herein as ________20________.

________ The Ld Tribunal directed the Respondent to herein finalise the amendments in the RRs by applying classification of the post of enhancement of the age.

________ The eligibility criteria for the Post or Teacher (Primary), ___ under post code ________/________ & ________/________ were amended.

________ The Petitioner appeared in the examination.

________ Result of the said written Test was published and the Petitioner had secured ________marks (Cut off ________).

________ DSSSB issued an office order No. ________ in which the Petitioner's name was shown not eligible on the ground of "overage".

________ Petitioner made representation to the authority appraising the fact that the Petitioner is fully entitled to get age relaxation as per Hon'ble Delhi High Court Judgment in WPC No. ________ of 20________ in ________ (________).

________ 20________ Petitioner filed O A No. ________ of 20________ with the Hon'ble Tribunal, being aggrieved by the office order No. ________ and Rejection Notice dated ________20________ and challenged the order to an extent she is affected on the ground of "overage".

________ Pursuant to the notices issued, the Respondents entered appearance and filed replies to which the Petitioner has filed Rejoinder. It was informed to the Hon'ble Tribunal by the Respondents that Mr. ________ had done ___ course in the year 20________, so he was entitled for one time age relaxation which is totally wrong.

________ The Hon'ble Tribunal disposed of OA No. ________ of 20________ with a liberty to the applicant to seek re-consideration of the O.A after the disposal of the Writ Petition (C) No. ________ of 20________ ________ (________) by this Hon'ble Court.

__________ The Petitioner has filed Impleadment Application CM No. ________ of 20________in Writ Petition (C) No. ________ of 20________ with this Hon'ble Court.

__________ This Hon'ble Court did not give permission for impleadment and advised to file a Separate Writ Petition.

__________ Hence the Present Petition

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO_____ OF 20________

IN THE MATTER OF:
________ �.PETITIONER
VERSUS
__________ �.RESPONDENTS

TO,
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HIS COMPANION JUDGES OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI.

HUMBLE PETITION OF THE PETITIONERS ABOVE NAMED

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 READ WITH 2___ OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 3RD ___________ PASSED BY THE HON'BLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL IN OA NO. ____ OF__.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. That the present Writ Petition under Article 226 read with 2___ of the Constitution of India is against the order dated __________rd October __________20__________ passed by the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, (hereinafter referred as 'Hon'ble Tribunal') in OA No. __________ of 20__________ vide which the Hon'ble Tribunal has disposed of the OA on the basis of an interim order passed by this Hon'ble Court on__________.20__________ in Writ Petition (C) No. __________ of 20__________ titled ___ & Ors __________& Ors. A copy of the order dated __________20__________ passed by the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. __________ of 20__________is annexed and marked as Annexure P-1 (Pages _________).

A copy of the Order dated __________20__________ passed by this Hon'ble Court in ___ & Ors v. __________ & Ors, W.P. (C) No. __________ of 20__________ is annexed herewith and attached as Annexure P-2 (Pages _________).

FACTS LEADING TO FILING OF THE PRESENT PETITION
2. Brief facts necessary for deciding the Present petition are as follows:
(i) That Petitioner has done ___ in the year 2006-2008 from Madhymic Shiksha Mandal Madhya Pradesh, ___.

(ii) That pursuant to the Advertisement No. __________ of 20__________of Delhi ___ the Petitioner had applied for the Post of Primary Teacher in Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Post Code __________/__________ and participated in the selection process, Roll No. __________. She got __________Marks. Despite the applicant having secured more marks than the cut-off marks (__________) for OBC category, she has not been considered for appointment on the ground of being 'overage'. In the rejection order No. __________ dated __________20, the applicants name figures at Sr. No. __________.

(iii) The Petitioner had challenged the impugned rejection order No. __________ dated __________20__________ in the Central Administrative Tribunal by way of O.A. No. __________/20__________
A copy of entire CAT Record of O.A. No. __________/20__________ filed by Petitioner with the Central Administrative Tribunal is annexed herewith and attached as Annexure P-3 (Pages _________).

(iv) Pursuant to the notices issued, the respondents entered appearance and filed replies, to which the Petitioner has filed separate rejoinders.

(v) That while hearing both the OAs, the Respondents informed the Hon'ble Tribunal that an identical O.A., being O.A. No. __________ of 20__________ titled ___ & Others v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Others, the tribunal vide order dated __________20__________ had granted the relief that are being claimed by the Petitioners in the said O.As. on the basis of __________ (__________) and __________ (__________). The aboe order of the Tribunal had been challenged by the Govt. of NCT of Delhi and others before the Hon'ble High court in W.P. (C) No. __________/20__________. The Hon'ble High Court has been pleased to pass an interim order dated __________20__________ in the said W.P. staying the operation of the Tribunal's order dated __________20__________. They have, thus, contended that the controversy involved in this O.As could be adjudicated after the fate of said W.P. is decided by the Hon'ble High Court.

(vi) That after hearing these submission of the Respondents, the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal on __________20__________, disposed of the OA filed by the Petitioner with the following observations/Directions:

"16. We would like to observe that from the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in C.A. No. __________/20__________ and R.P. (C) NO. __________/20__________ in the said C.A., it is quite evident that these judgments are in personama and not in rem. Therefore, the applicants in the instant O.As cannot get any benefit from the said judgments. We also find considerable merit in the submission made on behalf of the respondents that these O.As would be taken up for adjudication after the disposal of the W.P. (C) No. __________/20__________ of the Hon'ble High Court."

"17.In the conspectus, we do not find any necessity to keep these O.As pending. We dispose them of at this stage by granting liberty to the applicants to seek reconsideration of these O.As. after the disposal of the W.P.(C) No. __________/20__________ � __________ (__________) by the Hon'ble High Court�."

(vii) That the Hon'ble Tribunal did not try to verify the facts from the records which show that Mr. __________had done ___ from ___ which is the same qualification of Petitioner.

(viii) That the Hon'ble Tribunal failed to appreciate the fact that admittedly the Petitioners possess the ___ which is sufficient qualification for the post of primary teacher as mandated by the Hon'ble Tribunal in O.A. No. __________ of 20__________ which was upheld by this Hon'ble Court by Judgment dated __________th July 20__________ in Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board v. __________W.P. (c) No. __________ of 20__________. This Hon'ble Court in the said judgment held that a candidate who had completed course from Delhi is to be given age relaxation as per the decision in __________ (__________), the same age relaxation should be provided to the persons who are identically placed in terms of educational qualifications. Extracts of the Judgment of this Hon'ble Court in __________ (__________) is:

"12. There is an agreement between the parties which is also borne out from the fact that the respondents was permitted to appear in the examination as far as the educational qualifications were concerned, which means that he was eligible. The equivalence of the ___ course and the ___ is not in dispute. However, in Delhi, the nomenclature is certificate in ___ course while in other states a different nomenclature is adopted, for example in ___, it is ___, in Haryana, it is JVT and similarly, BLT is in some other state. Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that there cannot be a difference in criteria for the same post for different states as this was not the objection in terms of advertisement and in case, a candidate who had completed course from Delhi is to be given age relaxation as per the decision in ___ (supra), the same age relaxation should be provided to the persons who are identically placed in terms of educational qualifications.

13. We find force in the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent that there cannot be different age criteria for different candidates when the educational qualification and equivalence there of stands recognized by the petitioner herein. In our view, the Tribunal had correctly applied the law to the facts of this case. We find no ground to interfere with the impugned order. Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed. The order of the Tribunal shall be complied with forth with."

(ix) Thereafter the Respondents had filed a Special Leave Petition No. __________ of 20__________with the Hon'ble Supreme Court (Civil Appeal No. __________ of 20__________). While hearing the Petition, it was wrongly informed to the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the age relaxation allowed in __________ (__________) was a onetime age relaxation for written test to be conducted in 20__________ only, which was wrong, as the direction given in the Judgment __________ (__________) was to give age relaxation to the candidates who have completed the ___ course in the year 2006 or 2007 or 2008. Due to this error the Hon'ble Supreme Court allowed the SLP filed by the Respondents as Mr. __________was appeared for the examination in 20__________.

(x) That thereafter Mr. __________ had filed a review petition titled __________. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board, Review Petition No. __________ of 20__________, in Civil Appeal No. __________ of 20__________ highlighting this error i.e. the age relaxation given was not only for the year 20__________ but also for candidates who have completed their course in the year 2006 or 2007 or 2008. When the error was noticed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, notice was issued in the said Review Petition, heard the matter in open court and allowed the Review Petition filed by Mr. __________. Hon'ble Supreme Court said that since the benefit of relaxation given to the candidates who have completed the ___ course in the year 2006 or 2007 or 2008, the appearance in the examination in 20__________ is, therefore, no consequence.

(xi) That since the dispute regarding equivalence of educational qualification was already settled; the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Judgment used the word "___" just to represent the educational qualification.

(xii) That the Respondents have wrongly twisted the facts in such a way that Mr. __________had done ___ course not ___ from ___, hence his Review Petition was allowed. With this argument the Respondents have filed Writ Petition No. __________ of 20__________ tiled ___ & Ors Vs. __________& Ors and sought stay against Order in OA No. __________ of 20__________ and order dated __________20__________ in Contempt Petition No. __________ of 20__________. While filing the said petition the Respondents have concealed from this Hon'ble Court, the admitted fact that Mr. __________ had done ___ (__________Course) in 20__________ note ___ Course and the certificate was granted by Board of Secondary Education, Madhya Pradesh, ___. Respondents have also have concealed the fact that the disputes regarding equivalence of educational qualification had settled by this Hon'ble court in Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board v. __________W.P. (c) No. __________ of 20__________.

(xiii) That in __________ (__________) the arguments of the Respondents from the Hon'ble Tribunal to Hon'ble Supreme Court was that Mr. __________ had done ___ from ___, not ___ from Delhi, so he is not eligible to get age relaxation as per __________ (__________) judgment.

3. GROUNDS:
A. Because the Hon'ble Tribunal failed to appreciate that a Division Bench of this Hon'ble court by its Judgment dated __________ __________, 20__________ in Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board v. __________W.P. (c) No. __________ of 20__________, held that a candidate who had completed ___ course from Delhi is to be given age relaxation as per the decision in __________ (__________), the same age relaxation should be provided to the persons who are identically placed in terms of educational qualifications.

B. Because the Hon'ble Tribunal failed to appreciate that the Petitioners in Writ Petition (C) No. __________ of 20__________ have concealed the fact that Mr. __________had done ___, not ___ course and wrongly mentioned in the Writ Petition that he had done ___ course. It is an admitted fact that he had done ___ (__________) 20__________ and the certificate was granted by Board of Secondary Education, Madhya Pradesh, ___. Hence the petitioner is eligible to get age relaxation given to Mr. __________as per __________ (__________) judgment.

C. Because the Hon'ble Tribunal completely ignored the order dated __________20__________ passed by this Hon'ble Court in ________ Vs. State of NCT Delhi & Ors where by this Hon'ble Court said in Paragraph 5 of the order that � we find that the petitioner has been non-suited simply on the ground that she does not possess an ___ degree, which prima facie appears to be an erroneous view in the light of the judgment of Division Bench in the case of __________ (__________). It seems that the learned Tribunal has not examined the aforesaid decision in the correct prospective. The Ld. Tribunal has disposed of the OA filed by the Petitioner without considering the said observation of this Hon'ble Court.

D. Because the Hon'ble Tribunal failed to appreciate that A Division Bench of this Hon'ble court had dismissed the Writ Petition (Civil) No. __________ of 20__________ filed by the Respondents with same plea that those candidates who did ___ course only will get age relaxation. This Hon'ble Court had dealt with the contentions of the Petitioners and held that the educational qualification of Mr. __________is equivalent to ___ course. The Petitioners wrongly mentioned in the instant Writ Petition that, because Mr. __________had done ___ course, the Supreme Court of India has allowed his Review Petition. It is clearly mentioned in Para 13 of the order dated __________20__________ of Central Administrative Tribunal in OA No. __________ of 20__________ that Mr. __________who had done equivalent to ___ course had been considered for the said post. The Hon'ble Tribunal did not consider it while disposing of the O.A.

E. Because the Hon'ble Tribunal failed to appreciate that the entire dispute in __________ (__________) case from Tribunal to this Hon'ble court and Hon'ble Supreme Court was due to the ___ he done from ___, Madhya Pradesh, which was not accepted by the Respondents as eligible qualification to get age relaxation as per __________ (__________) judgment. If he had done ___ course as claimed by the respondents, no dispute might have arisen.

F. Because the Hon'ble Tribunal failed to appreciate the fact that the issue arose in __________ Vs. DSSSB that the candidate who passed the ___ is equal to ___ course and such candidate is entitled for age relaxation as held in __________ (__________) case or not. This Hon'ble Court had clearly held that the candidates who completed courses and ___ from different states with different nomenclature are equivalent to the ___ course and such candidates would be entitled to get age relaxation as held in __________ (__________) case.

G. Because the Hon'ble Tribunal did not consider all these facts while disposing of O.A No. __________ of 20__________ which resulted violation of rights guaranteed to the Petitioners under Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
4. That the petitioners submit that no other petition against the impugned order has been filed by the petitioners except the impleadment application CM No. __________ dated __________20__________ which was disposed of by this Hon'ble Court on __________.20__________ with a direction to file separate Writ Petition.

5. That the petitioners do not have no other efficacious alternative remedy than to file the present writ petition.

PRAYERS
In view of the facts & circumstances stated above, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:--
a) Issue an appropriate Writ quashing the impugned order dated __________20__________ passed by the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, in Original Application No. __________ of 20__________.

b) Any other relief, order or direction this court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of this case.

THROUGH;

__________________
COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER

Dated: __.__.
20__________