Live
- Educational Trips in South Kanara Put on Hold Following Murudeshwar Drowning Incident
- Karnataka Temple Embraces Mechanical Elephant for Cruelty-Free Ceremonies
- Temple modelled after Ram Mandir to be constructed in US
- Property dealer shot dead in broad daylight in Ranchi
- Maharashtra: CM Fadnavis expands Cabinet; inducts 39 ministers
- Winter Session of UP Assembly from Dec 16; CM seeks cooperation of all parties
- AIADMK executive council meet passes sixteen resolutions, vows to make Edappadi CM again
- Manchu Family Feud Resurfaces in Jalpally
- Kerala Hindu leader gifts Rig Veda to Pope Francis
- 35 miners trapped under rubble in Afghanistan
Delhi HC dismisses petition challenging CBSE chairman's appointment
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the appointment of senior IAS officer Nidhi Chhibber as the chairman of the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) as part of a bureaucratic reshuffle.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the appointment of senior IAS officer Nidhi Chhibber as the chairman of the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) as part of a bureaucratic reshuffle.
The plea, filed by the Independent School Federation of India, alleged that Chhibber did not meet the necessary terms and conditions for the CBSE Chairman position.
However, Justice Chandra Dhari Singh rejected this claim, stating that no prima facie case had been made out by the petitioner.
Justice Singh further asserted that the petition was a "gross misuse of the process of law."
He also clarified that the court was not inclined to issue a writ of quo warranto in this case, as Chhibber met the qualifications required for the position of the Chairperson of the Central Board of Secondary Education.
The petitioner Federation not only challenged Chhibber's appointment but also sought her discontinuation from the post. They requested the production of records related to her eligibility and experience for the role.
In response, Chhibber submitted an affidavit, stating that she had worked in the Education department for 48 months in the cadre of Director and above.
Her counsel argued that the allegations made in the petition were incorrect, and she met the qualifications and experience criteria outlined in the 2015 vacancy circular for the position.
After reviewing Chhibber's affidavit and the executive record sheet, the court found that she met the required criteria for the position.
It clarified that the writ of quo warranto is issued when a person holding a public office is found to lack the necessary qualifications for the position. In this case, Chhibber was deemed eligible for the role.
Justice Singh concluded that the petition was a misuse of the legal process and subsequently dismissed the petition along with any pending applications.
