Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 7097
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A), Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)
Sh. Praveen – Appellant
Versus
All India Institute of Medical Sciences – Respondent
O.A No. 3799/2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Divyansh Hanu Rathi
For the Respondents: Mr. V. S. R. Krishna, Mr. Sumit Chander, Mr. Gurdeep Chauhan
Appointment eligibility cannot be denied based on arbitrary technical requirements regarding certification of OBC status.
Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Candidature cancellation - Applicant applied for Pharmacist position at AIIMS, was selected but denied due to alleged non-submission of OBC (NCL) certificate for a specific period - Court ruled that denying appointment based on technical grounds was arbitrary, reaffirming that OBC status is permanent and certificates are just affirmations. (Paras 2, 7, 8)
(B) The principle that a candidate's belonging to OBC is not determined by the issuance date of certificates but by their status. (Paras 6, 7)
Facts of the case:
The applicant qualified for the Pharmacist position but faced cancellation of candidature for not providing required documentation on time, despite submitting proof of status.
Findings of Court:
The court held that the cancellation was arbitrary and directed the reinstatement of the applicant with merit recognition.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant's OBC status could negate his appointment eligibility due to technical deficiencies in documentation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that OBC certificates affirm existing status, and arbitrary cut-off dates imposed by authorities violate equitable rights.
Result: The applicant’s cancellation was quashed, and he was ordered to be considered for appointment.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. candidature cancellation due to technicalities. (Para 2) |
| 2. arguments on the necessity of timely document submission. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's observation on obc status and its implications. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. failure to meet technical requirements should not revoke fundamental rights. (Para 7) |
| 5. the balance of convenience favors reinstatement of the applicant. (Para 8) |
Hon’ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)
Sh. Praveen S/o Sh. Laxmi Narayan H. No. 464, Bakhtawar Pur New Delhi, 110036 Email: rinkus532@gmail.com Mob: 9599935551. ....Applicant (By Advocate : Mr. Divyansh Hanu Rathi)
Versus All India Institute of Medical Sciences Through its Administrative Officer, Recruitment Cell, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi 110029. ...Respondents (By Advocate : Mr V. S. R. Krishna, Mr. Sumit Chander and Mr.
Gurdeep Chauhan)
ORDER Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A):
The instant OA has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act , 1985, seeking the following reliefs:-
"8. i To direct the Respondent No. 1 to reinstate the candidature of the Applicant and ii. To direct the Respondent No. 1 to issue Employment Letter to the Applicant for the position of the Pharmacist at AIIMS, New Delhi.
iii. To allow the OA with exemplary costs.
Pass any other or further relief/s which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case."
2. The factual matrix of the case as per the counsel of the applicant is that in response to the advertisement No. 1-28/2021- Estt-I(RCT) dated 10.11.2022 for various posts at AIIMS, the applicant applied under OBC (NCL) category for the post of Pharmacist Grade-II and appeared in the entrance examination held on 27.03.2023. He qualified the said exam with first rank in the OBC (NCL) Category with 64 marks vide Result Notice No. 30/2023 and was provisionally selected for the said post. However, his document verification could be done only after a long delay in May 2023 after numerous efforts put in by the applicant. Subsequently, he submitted all the requisite documents for verification. He was asked to submit his OBC (NCL) Certificate. He submitted his first OBC (NCL) Certificate which was issued to him in the year 2015 which was renewed for 2023-24 on 21.04.2023. He also submitted a letter dated 10.05.2023 issued by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (Alipur) Division which clarified that the applicant existed in the category of Non-creamy layer during the financial year 01.04.2022 to
31.03.2023. However, his candidature was cancelled by the Administrative Officer, AIIMS, New Delhi vide its letter dated 30.11.2023 wherein the reason given for cancellation/withdrawal of his candidature was non submission of OBC certificate for the period from 01.04.2022 to 31.03.2023. The main grievance of the applicant is that even after submitting clarificatory letter by the competent authority along with the OBC (NCL) Certificate, the respondents have illegally and arbitrarily cancelled his candidature Hence the present OA.
3. The counsel of the applicant vociferously argued his case relying on the following judgments :-
“(i) Priyanka Rani vs. GOI & Anr. 2022 SCC OnLine Del 2621, dated
17.08.2022 wherein the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held as under :-
“40. The documents on record establish that the Appellant belongs to the OBC (NCL) category and she was OBC (NCL) category candidate on the cut-off date for submission of the documents i.e., 31.12.2021. She was in the OBC category at the time of issuance of the advertisement and today also she belongs to the OBC (NCL) category.
41. This Court, keeping in view the totality of the circumstances of case, is of the opinion that the respondents have taken a hyper-technical approach by denying the right of appointment to the petitioner especially when undisputedly, right from 2015 till date she is a member of OBC (NCL) category.
45. In the considered opinion of this Court, the Appellant who was a member of OBC (NCL) Category did submit a certifi
