Fact of the Case 

In the Matter of Vinayak Sharma v. Indian Coast Guard, The petitioner filed a complaint against the respondent’s denial of his application for the position of Assistant Commander Regular Duty in the Indian Coast Guard, which was dated 27 December 2022. The petitioner, a final-year graduate, applied under the unreserved category for the rank of Assistant Commandant General Duty in the Indian Coast Guard. He was chosen for Stages 1, 2, and 3 but was disqualified for being overweight because he was unfit. The defendants notified the petitioner’s father that his application was denied because he was enrolled in the fifth semester rather than the final semester, despite the petitioner’s father’s prayers for inclusion on the select list. This resulted in the petition being submitted.

Analysis of Court order 

A joint bench of the Delhi High Court Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Sharma instructed the respondents to take into account the petitioner’s request for appointment with the 02/2023 batch while maintaining the seniority and associated benefits of the 01/2023 batch. If there is no opening, the respondents are instructed to create one seat for the petitioner with the 01/2023 batch.

The Court observed that the respondents did not examine the petitioner’s qualifications at any of the examination stages, particularly while they claimed that the Stage II examination was the stage for document verification. The claim that the petitioner was unable to pass the required phases of the test for the position in issue is untrue. The petitioner’s steadfast desire to join the Force is demonstrated by the fact that he reduced 15 kg in 42 days while working extremely hard to pass the respondents’ Stage IV Medical and was subsequently deemed successful

As a result, the Court granted the petition and instructed the respondent to take the petitioner’s request for an appointment with the 02/2023 batch into consideration. However, because of the petitioner’s seniority and other benefits from the 01/2023 batch, the respondent is also instructed to create one seat for the 01/2023 batch in the event that there is no opening.

CASE NAME – Vinayak Sharma v. Indian Coast Guard, WP.(C) 3134/2023