AMAR SINGH vs COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 16.04.2025 Pronounced on: 01.07.2025 + W.P.(C) 3424/2019 AMAR SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sourabh Ahuja, Advocate versus COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Neeraj, Mr. Vedansh Anand, Mr. Sachin Saraswat and Mr. Soumyadip Chakraborty, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR JUDGMENT NAVIN CHAWLA, J. CM APPL. 15723/2019 1. Additional documents have already been taken on record vide Order dated 17.01.2020. 2. The application is accordingly disposed of. W.P.(C) 3424/2019 3. The petitioner, an unsuccessful candidate in the 2009 selection process for the post of Constable (Bugler) in the Delhi Police, has approached this Court by way of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs: Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 3424/2019 Page 1 of 17 By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Date:01.07.2025 18:06:28 “a. Quash and set aside order dated 12.10.2018 passed by Ld. Tribunal in OA No. 407/ 2013. And b. Declare the action of the Respondents (Selection Board/Board of Officers) as illegal in as much as they have deviated from the practice (whereby the marks are awarded to a candidate/aspirant for the post of Constable (Bugler) on the basis of his performance on playing Bugle only) which was followed in Delhi Police since time immemorial. And c. Direct the Respondents to appoint the Petitioner to the post of Constable (Bugler) and accord him all the consequential benefits viz. seniority, fixation of pay, promotion, back wages etc. And d. Award cost in favour of the Petitioner and against the respondents.” FACTS OF THE CASE: 4. In 2009, the Delhi Police issued an advertisement notifying vacancie