Uttarakhand High CourtEmployment and Labour LawAdministrative and Public Law

Selected Accountant Candidate May Renew Joining-Time Plea After Mother’s Illness, Uttarakhand HC Directs Decision Within A Month

RANJAY KUMARv.UNION OF INDIA

Selected Accountant Candidate May Renew Joining-Time Plea After Mother’s Illness, Uttarakhand HC Directs Decision Within A Month. RANJAY KUMAR vs UNION OF INDIA. Uttarakhand High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

1. Whether the petitioner’s request for additional time to join, made on account of his mother’s serious illness, should be reconsidered in light of the applicable rules and the Central Government’s Office Memorandum dated 9 August 1995.

The court held

The petition was disposed of without a final determination on the legality of the cancellation or the petitioner’s entitlement to appointment or consequential benefits.

It also directed

The petitioner may submit a fresh representation to respondent no. 2, which must pass a reasoned order within one month of receiving the order, considering the 9 August 1995 Office Memorandum and prevailing rules; delay is not to stand in the way of that consideration.

01Facts

The petitioner was selected for appointment as an Accountant in a 2017 recruitment process. He sought additional time to join, stating that his mother was seriously ill, but his appointment was cancelled and the post was offered to another person.

¶ 5–6

After initially approaching the CAT and then the Lucknow High Court, which the petitioner attributed to wrong advice, he sought, among other reliefs, quashing of the cancellation and restoration of his appointment.

¶ 4, 8

02Issues

i.1. Whether the petitioner’s request for additional time to join, made on account of his mother’s serious illness, should be reconsidered in light of the applicable rules and the Central Government’s Office Memorandum dated 9 August 1995.

¶ 6, 8

ii.2. Whether the petitioner was entitled to immediate restoration of appointment and consequential service and monetary benefits.

¶ 4

03Law Applied

The Court directed the respondent authority to consider the petitioner’s representation in light of the Office Memorandum dated 9 August 1995 and the prevailing rules.

¶ 8

It also expressed the view that a genuine request for an extension of joining time should receive a humanitarian and liberal consideration.

¶ 7

04Reasoning

The Court considered the petitioner’s stated reason for seeking more time and took the prima facie view that a genuine request of this kind warranted humanitarian consideration.

¶ 6–7

Rather than deciding whether the cancellation was unlawful or directing restoration of the appointment, it required the petitioner to make a fresh representation and directed respondent no. 2 to examine it against the 1995 Office Memorandum and prevailing rules. The Court further directed that delay would not defeat consideration of the representation, given the petitioner’s explanation that he had initially pursued the matter in the CAT and the Lucknow High Court on wrong advice.

¶ 8

05Holding

The petition was disposed of without a final determination on the legality of the cancellation or the petitioner’s entitlement to appointment or consequential benefits.

¶ 8–9

The petitioner may submit a fresh representation to respondent no. 2, which must pass a reasoned order within one month of receiving the order, considering the 9 August 1995 Office Memorandum and prevailing rules; delay is not to stand in the way of that consideration.

¶ 8–9
Uttarakhand High Court

Original Court PDF

RANJAY KUMARvsUNION OF INDIA

Uttarakhand High Court · November 02, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment