CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.2556/2017 Reserved on: 13.11.2025 Pronounced on: 06.01.2026 Hon’ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)

Hon’ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)

Pushpender Kumar, S/o Sh. Harpal Singh, R/o Flat No.722, Type-II, Tihar Jail Complex, New Delhi - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. U. Srivastava)

VERSUS

1. Govt. of NCT Delhi through the Chief Secretary, Delhi Secretariat, New Delhi

2. The Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board, Through its Chairman, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, F-18, Karkardooma, Institutional Area, Delhi-92 - Respondents (By Advocate: Mr. KM Singh)

ORDER Hon’ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J):

The applicant, whose date of birth is 14.12.1989, joined Tihar Jail on 01.07.2004 against a Group-C post and has been discharging his duties satisfactorily with an unblemished service record. In the year 2014, respondent No. 2 issued Advertisement No. 01/14 inviting applications for recruitment to various posts under the Government of NCT of Delhi, Municipal Corporations of Delhi and NDMC. The applicant applied for Post Code 21/14 (Assistant Malaria Inspector), Post Code 22/14 (Assistant Public Health Inspector/Vaccinator) and Post Code 93/14 (Assistant Sanitary Inspector). The examination for the aforesaid post codes was scheduled to be held on 05.03.2017. As per the instructions notified on the official website of DSSSB, the applicant downloaded his e-admit card on 25.02.2017. The admit card as well as the instructions available on the website required the candidates to bring the admit card along with one original photo identity proof such as Voter ID, Aadhaar Card or Driving Licence. There was no instruction either on the website or on the admit card requiring the pasting of a postcard size photograph on the admit card. The applicant reported at the examination centre on 05.03.2017 well within the prescribed time. However, he was not permitted to enter the examination hall on the ground that he had not pasted a recent postcard size (4" x 6") photograph on the admit card, which requirement had not been notified earlier.

2. Owing to the confusion created at the examination centre, several candidates were similarly prevented from appearing in the examination. A call was made to the police authorities and, upon their intervention, the candidates were allowed to enter the examination hall nearly one hour after the commencement of the examination. Despite the delayed entry of the affected candidates, the examination concluded strictly as per the original schedule and no additional or compensatory time was granted. As a result, the applicant could not attempt all the questions, although the examination consisted of 200 objective-type questions to be completed within two hours.

3. The applicant submitted a joint representation dated 08.03.2017, followed by a reminder dated 08.05.2017, requesting appropriate relief including re-conduct of the examination or adjustment of marks. No decision on the said representations was communicated to the applicant. Subsequently, the respondents declared the result for Post Codes 21/14 and 93/14, wherein the applicant secured 59.5 marks. The result for Post Code 22/14 has not yet been declared and appointments in respect thereof are stated to be under process.

4. The grievance of the applicant is that his representations were not considered and the result was declared without redressing the prejudice caused to him due to the delay in permitting him to appear in the examination.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant had complied with all the conditions mentioned in the advertisement, scheme of examination and admit card, including reporting within time and producing valid photo identity proof. It is further contended that the insistence on pasting a postcard size photograph on the admit card, which was not part of the notified instructions, was arbitrary and contrary to the terms of the advertisement and admit card.