Full Judgment Text
$~18
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: September 05, 2022
+ W.P.(C) 12056/2022 & CM APPLN. 36017/2022
NEHA JADHAV ...... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Abhay Kumar Bhargava &
Mr.Satyarth B.Sinha, Advocates
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Rajesh Kumar & Mr. Puneet
Yadav, Advocates with Mr.A.S.
Malik, DIG (Sports), BSF; Mr.Rajbir
Singh, DC (Sports), BSF, Mr.
Hemendra Singh, Deputy
Commandant (Law), Ms. Poonam,
Government Pleader
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE
J U D G M E N T (oral)
1. By this petition, petitioner is seeking quashing of order dated
12.08.2022 passed by the Commandant 18 BN BSF and issuance of a writ
of mandamus directing the respondents to allow her to participate in the
th
60 Diploma Course in Sports Coaching for Session 2022-23 at Netaji
Subhash National Institute of Sports, Patiala.
2. Pertinently, vide impugned order dated 12.08.2022 the petitioner was
informed that permission to appear in the entrance test of one year diploma
W.P.(C) 12056/2022 Page 1 of 5
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PREM
BALA CHHABRA
Signing Date:07.09.2022
11:10
course in sports coaching for the session 2022-23 stood cancelled vide
signal dated 30.05.2022. However, since the impugned communication did
not spell the reasons for cancellation of aforesaid permission, therefore, on
the last date of hearing i.e. 22.08.2022 we had suspended its operation and
th
directed the respondents to permit the petitioner to participate in the 60
Diploma Course in Sports Coaching for the session 2022-23. On the last
date, counsel appearing on behalf of respondents had sought time to obtain
instructions.
3. Today, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents submits
that pursuant to last order, an affidavit has been filed but the same is not on
record. A copy of the said affidavit has been placed before this Court for
perusal thereof.
4. Mr.A.S. Malik, DIG (Sports), BSF is present and he submits that
petitioner had applied for the subject course pursuant to guidelines dated
23.04.2022, however, thereafter the revised guidelines were issued by the
Sports Authority of India and time for submitting the nominations was
extended till 06.06.2022. Thereafter, one another candidate/mahila
constable, who had applied for the course, was found to be a better
candidate for the course and so, the petitioner has been dropped and thus,
this petition deserves to be dismissed.
5. The grievance of petitioner is that she was desirous of appearing in
th
the 60 Diploma Course in Sports Coaching for Session 2022-23 and since
she was permitted to appear in the entrance test vide communication dated
20.05.2022, she appeared for the same on 28.07.2022. Thereafter, she was
recommended for admission in diploma course and as such paid the fee of
Rs.59,800/- for the course. However, she received the impugned
W.P.(C) 12056/2022 Page 2 of 5
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PREM
BALA CHHABRA
Signing Date:07.09.2022
11:10
communication dated 12.08.2022 intimating her regarding cancellation of
the permission granted.
6. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that after receiving of
communication dated 20.05.2022, only movement order dated 30.05.2022
was received by the petitioner and no other communication was received
and also that she has already paid the fee and joined the course by virtue of
last order passed by this Court and so, she be permitted to continue with the
course.
7. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the
record of this case, we find that the Netaji Subhash National Institute of
Sports, Sports Authority of India had invited online applications from
eligible candidates for admission to the Diploma Course in Sports
Coaching for the academic session 2022-23 with the last date of hearing as
22.05.2022. Accordingly, Training Directorate (Sports Cell), FHQ, BSF
sought nominations of willing and eligible sports persons on 04.05.2022. In
th
response thereto, petitioner applied for 60 Diploma Course in Sports
Coaching for Session 2022-23 on 18.05.2022 and vide communication
dated 20.05.2022, she along with short listed candidates of different
disciplines were informed that she was found eligible for the course.
However, thereafter selection criteria was revised and the date for
submission of online application form was also extended upto 06.06.2020
and for this reason, the competent authority vide signal dated 20.05.2022
cancelled the permission granted and invited fresh nominations of willing
and eligible candidates on 31.05.2022. The competent authority had
considered applications of all the candidates who had applied earlier in
response to communication dated 04.05.2022; those 05 candidates who
W.P.(C) 12056/2022 Page 3 of 5
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PREM
BALA CHHABRA
Signing Date:07.09.2022
11:10
were found eligible vide signal dated 20.05.2022 as well as fresh
nominations pursuant to signal dated 31.05.2022.
8. The stand of respondents is that fair opportunity was granted to all
the candidates including the petitioner to apply for the course, but another
Mahila Constable was found more meritorious than the petitioner and
therefore, she was selected for sending her nominations. While making the
aforesaid plea, the respondents have lost sight of the fact that initially when
the nominations were invited for the course, only petitioner was found
eligible as per the criteria specified under the then prevalent guidelines,
pursuant to which she was granted permission to appear in the entrance
test. The petitioner had qualified the test and after her name appeared in the
provisional merit list, she paid the fee on 28.07.2022. Thereafter, vide
impugned order dated 12.08.2022, petitioner was informed that by virtue of
signal dated 30.05.2022 her permission to appear in the entrance test stood
cancelled. A bare perusal of signal dated 30.05.2022 shows that it is a
movement order and it nowhere speaks of cancellation of permission
granted qua the course.
9. Further, in Para-8 of their counter affidavit, respondents have stated
that by virtue of revised guidelines, with an intent to give wide publicity
and chance to more candidates, the age limit was enhanced from 35 years
to 45 years. We find that the new candidate had never applied under the old
guidelines despite the fact that she was very much eligible. The petitioner’s
case was considered under both the guidelines but her nomination was
rejected under the revised guidelines. However, since petitioner had applied
prior to coming into force of the revised guidelines and was found eligible
under the old guidelines and after passing the entrance test, had been
W.P.(C) 12056/2022 Page 4 of 5
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PREM
BALA CHHABRA
Signing Date:07.09.2022
11:10
selected in the provisional merit list, she cannot be denied to undertake the
course after coming into force of the revised guidelines. Needless to say, if
there is any new meritorious and deserving candidate under the revised
guidelines, her/his candidature can be considered for future nominations as
per rules.
10. In view of aforesaid observations, the impugned order dated
12.08.2022 passed by the Commandant 18 BN BSF is set aside. Pursuant to
directions of this Court, petitioner has already joined the online classes
w.e.f. 18.08.2022 for the course. We are informed that classes with
physical appearance for the course shall commence from 19.09.2022 at
Patiala. Accordingly, respondents are directed to grant permission in
writing to the petitioner within three days of receipt of this order for
attending physical classes w.e.f. 19.09.2022.
11. With aforesaid directions, the present petition and pending
application are disposed of.
(SURESH KUMAR KAIT)
JUDGE
(SAURABH BANERJEE)
JUDGE
SEPTEMBER 05, 2022
r
W.P.(C) 12056/2022 Page 5 of 5
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PREM
BALA CHHABRA
Signing Date:07.09.2022
11:10