MONU vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~63 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 17370/2025 & CM APPL. 71710/2025 MONU .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vivek Sheel, Ms. Deepshikha, Mr. Anshul Mahajan, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Honey Khanna, SPC and Mr. Gaurav Khosla, GP for UOI with Mr. Devender Singh, DC JAG CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 17.11.2025 C.HARI SHANKAR, J. 1. A classic case, we may say, of much ado about nothing. 2. The petitioner is a youth belonging to a humble rural background who desires to serve in the Indo Tibetan Border Police 1. Consequent to Advertisement 11/2024, the petitioner applied for recruitment to the post of Constable (Driver). That he is qualified for the said post is not in dispute. The admit cards for the examination were issued nearly a year after the application on 3 November 2025. 3. At that time, the petitioner came to know that his application was rejected with the note – “Name is incorrect. Kindly re-submit application form within 03 days from today.” This communication, 1 “ITBP” hereinafter Signature Not Verified Signed By:PREETI W.P.(C) 17370/2025 Page 1 of 3 Signing Date:17.11.2025 18:13:25 according to the petitioner, was never received by him. 4. Given the nature of the dispute in this case, we do not deem it necessary to burden this order with any detailed allusion of facts. 5. The petitioner’s name is Monu. He has no surname. The admission form, however, required a name and a surname to be filled. Both the columns have the name Monu filled in them. According to the petitioner, this was an automated result of the fact that the petitioner’s name was Monu and that he did not have a surname. 6. In any case, there is no dispute about the fact that the