JITESH ARORA Vs. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was offered appointment vide appointment letter dated 5/ 6.7.2012, Annexure-5 to the writ petition, wherein father's name of the petitioner was mentioned as "Mahesh Arora". The petitioner was not allowed to join on the ground that the correct name of his father is "Mahesh Kumar Arora". The petitioner has filed an affidavit of his father that Mahesh Arora alias Mahesh Kumar Arora is one and the same person. The father of the petitioner got it published in the Newspapers that Mahesh Arora alias Mahesh Kumar Arora is one and the same person.

(2.) Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the record, I am of the opinion that joining should not be denied to the petitioner on the hyper-technical ground that the fathers name of the petitioner was initially mentioned as 'Mahesh Arora', while the correct name of his father is 'Mahesh Kumar Arora'. There seems to be no dispute about the identity of the petitioner or his father. In the absence of any dispute pertaining to the identity of the petitioner or his father refusal to give joining on the hypothetical and technical ground seems to be totally unjustified and arbitrary. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed with the direction to the respondents to give joining to the petitioner without any further delay, in any case, within 90 days from the date the certified copy is produced before them.