SANDEEP KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the writ petitions raising the same issue have been heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgement and order.

(2.) The challenge in all the writ petitions are the orders by which the Assam Rifle authority has rejected the claim of the petitioners for re-engagement in service as Constables on the ground of being opposed to the enrolment policy. While according to the petitioners, having regard to the facts and circumstances involved in the case, they are entitled to get enrolment in the Assam Rifles, but according to the respondents, considering the nature of the duties involved of a constable, the authority rightly passed the impugned orders and this Court exercising writ jurisdiction cannot sit on appeal over such decision of the competent authority.

(3.) The petitioners were selected for appointment as Constables in the Assam Rifles. However, while undergoing training for such appointment, they were found to be medically unfit in various categories and accordingly discharged from training in the year 2001. While some of the petitioners and other similarly situated candidates, approached the Delhi High Court challenging such orders of discharge, the rest of the petitioners including some others did not make any challenge to the said orders. As submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the Delhi High Court had dismissed the writ petitions in the year 2004 itself on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction. Thereafter, the petitioners approached this Court by filing writ petitions some time in 2009 and 2011, details of which are being discussed hereunder.