Rajiv Narain Raina, J. (Oral)
The dispute in the present writ petition is that the respondents had advertised 1073 posts of Lady Constable in the Police Department. The petitioners were candidates under the BC-A category. The physical measurement test etc. was conducted in 2010. The petitioners appeared for interview on 14.09.2010 Result of the selection was declared on 02.07.2011 Appointments were offered in 2011. The petitioners made a representation and then served a legal notice dated 02.06.2011 (Annexure P-2) on the respondents claiming that persons lower in merit than the petitioners have been selected and the names of the petitioners do not find mention in the merit list. The petitioners approached this Court through CWP No. 6285 of 2012, which was dismissed as withdrawn on 03.04.2012 with liberty to file a fresh one with specific information with regard to the comparative assessment of the petitioners with that of the successful respondents in order to substantiate their claim that they were more meritorious than the selected persons. The petitioners claim that thereafter they sent an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005. In those proceedings, the petitioners say that their counsel received a letter dated 04.08.2013 by which, they were informed that the Superintendent of Police had transferred their application to their Public Information Officer-cum-Superintendent of Police, Commando Neval, Karnal. Without taking the RTI proceedings to its logical conclusion by way of appeal, the petitioners have approached this Court by way of this petition. The selection process is long over. The recruitment process has become a dead boll. No ground for interference is made out. However, the petitioners would be at liberty to take the RTI proceedings to its logical conclusion and in case anything material is revealed therefrom, they will be at liberty to approach this Court again.
Writ petition is disposed of in the above said terms.