RAVI SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE the common reliefs have been sought by the petitioners in all these writ petitions, all these writ petitions are being heard and decided together with a common judgment.

(2.) THE petitioners were candidate for the post of Constable (Ground Duty) in Central Armed Police Forces (for short "CAPF's") i.e. ITBP, CRPF, CISF, SSB and Assam Rifles. They were not selected and they alleged some anomalies in the selection process and filed these writ petitions.

(3.) NOTICES were issued to the respondents. Short counter affidavits have been filed in all the writ petitions [except Writ Petition No.475 (SS) of 2014 (Rinku Kumar Vs. Union of India and others) and Writ Petition No.485 (SS) of 2014 (Vineet Kumar Vs. Union of India and others)] by one Mr. Anil Kumar Dadhich, Under Secretary, Staff Selection Commission (Northern Region), New Delhi/respondent no.2, in which it has been stated by the respondent no. 2 that: - "That it is also submitted that the respondents have now recast the result of the petitioner and revised his result and further allocated him to the I.T.B.P. as per his merit -cum -preference. That it is further submitted that after revision of the result of the petitioner, his dossier has been forwarded to the I.T.B.P. The Staff Selection Commission (Respondent no.2) is a recruiting agency and, therefore, its role is over after nomination of the candidate to the department for which he has been selected. That it is further, submitted that I.T.B.P., the department to which the dossier of the petitioner has been forwarded shall complete the pre -appointment formalities and take further action with regard to his appointment. That the respondents earnestly submits that the inadvertent mistake in processing the result of the petitioner was not an intentional one and for any other reason that was otherwise attributed to the respondent. However, the respondent regrets the inadvertent mistake and tenders unconditional apology for the same."