New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has imposed Rs 20,000 costs on the chairman of Staff Selection Commission (SSC) for the delay in compliance with its order to examine the answer sheets of a woman candidate who had applied for a post but mentioned the roll number incorrectly.
The court said its July 2019 order was complied with only after filing of the contempt petition by the candidate who has expended money.
The court was informed by the central government counsel that an order has been passed by the SSC Chairman on February 11, 2022, relating to the exam given by the candidate, however, it was neither communicated to the petitioner nor brought on record.
“Evidently, the said order is in purported compliance of the directions of this court…dated July 29, 2019. Let a copy of the said order be communicated to the counsel for the petitioner by the respondent (SSC) during the course of the day on his e-mail, leaving it open to the petitioner to pursue her remedies as may be available in law.
“However, insofar as the compliance has been done only after filing of the instant contempt petition for which the petitioner has expended money, a nominal amount of Rs 20,000 is imposed upon the respondent to be paid to the petitioner within two weeks, Justice Najmi Waziri said.
The court noted that no compliance affidavit has been filed by the SSC and the candidate has not been communicated any result, which may have been passed or declared by the authorities.
The court was hearing a contempt petition filed by a 24-year-old woman, through advocate Amit Kumar, who was preparing for competitive exams to secure a government job and after clearing Tier-I exam, she had participated in the Tier-II exam in 2018 for the post of LDC under the Combined Higher Secondary Level Examination-2017.
However, her candidature was rejected as she had committed a mistake by writing her roll number incorrectly.
By its July 2019 order, the high court had directed the SSC to examine the answer sheets of the candidate and if found eligible, to allow her to participate in the further process of her category as per rules and merits.
The commission filed an appeal challenging the July 2019 order, however, it was dismissed in February 2021.
The petitioner said more than five months have passed, yet the commission chose not to comply with the court’s directions and filed the petition seeking contempt action against the authorities.
Follow on Twitter | Posted by Neha Khan | 
