NAMRATA SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE are pained to note the merry-go-round, cat and mouse game, played at the instance of learned counsel for the petitioners and for which, as would be noted herein after, the petitioners would have to pay some price.

(2.) SEEKING public employment as a Lady Sub-Inspector under CISF, learned counsel for the petitioners drafted and filed a writ petition in this Court only impleading the Staff Selection Commission as a party and since CISF was not impleaded as a respondent, on the basis of learned counsel for the petitioners assigning a code to the writ petitions which required the same to be treated as raising a Civil Service related dispute under the Union, the Registry listed the writ petitions filed before a learned Single Judge where a stand was taken by the Staff Selection Commission that service disputes pertaining to the Union have to be adjudicated before the Central Administrative Tribunal and very gullibly the counsel for the petitioners withdrew the writ petitions stating that he would approach the Central Administrative Tribunal.

(3.) EVEN in the instant writ petitions, the Central Industrial Security has not been impleaded as a respondent and except for saying sorry and pleading before us that litigants should not suffer due to negligence or inefficiency of the counsel, learned counsel is able to render no better service.