A recruitment body is not mandated to maintain a waiting list unless explicitly stated in recruitment rules; candidates cannot claim such a right post-participation.

ORDER

Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)

In the present O.A. filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 , the applicants have prayed for the following reliefs:-

"A. Issue an order or directions, inter alia, declaring the Notice Cum Corrigendum No. F.4(406)/P&P/DSSB/2021/Advt./5070-81 dated 19.02.2024, issued by the Respondent Board, as null and void, being violative of the directions of this Hon'ble Court in WP(C) 5236/2012 titled “Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board v. Lokesh Kumar & Ors.” and WP(C) 3560/2016 titled “Amit Kumar & Anr. v. GNCTD & Ors.”

B. Issue an order or directions as may be deemed fit and proper, thereby directing the Respondent Board to adhere to the directions issued by this Hon’ble Court in WP(C) 5236/2012 and WP(C) 3560/2016, and prepare a waitlist/reserve panel of candidates for the combined examinations conducted by the Respondent Board.

C. Issue an order or directions as may be deemed fit and proper, thereby directing the Respondent Board to fill the unfilled/returned vacancies of OBC category, which are presently unfilled or may become unfilled after the scrutiny stage by the user departments, from the waitlist/reserve panel of qualified OBC candidates.

D. Issue an order or directions as may be deemed fit and proper, thereby directing the Respondent Board to consider the candidature of the applicants herein, who have successfully qualified the Tier 2 examination and completed the e-dossier submission, for filling any remaining posts or vacancies arising due to scrutiny by the user departments, and further ensure that the applicants are given due opportunity based on merit, in accordance with the relevant recruitment regulations.

E. Pass such other or further order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.

2. Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicant submitted as under:

2.1 The applicants, belonging to the OBC category under the Delhi-OBC quota, participated in the Combined Examination conducted by the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB) for the post of Junior Engineer (Civil)/Section Officer (Civil) under Post Code 801/22 for various departments of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi. In October 2021, the respondent, i.e., DSSSB issued Office Memoranda dated 07.10.2021 and 22.10.2021 introducing the Combined Examination Scheme on a prospective basis with the objective of reducing the number of examinations and ensuring administrative efficiency.

2.2. Pursuant to the said scheme, DSSSB issued Advertisement No. 01/22 dated 29.12.2021 advertising 575 vacancies, which were subsequently revised to 477 vacancies including 115 vacancies reserved for the OBC category, for the post of Junior Engineer (Civil)/Section Officer (Civil) under Post Code 801/22 in various departments such as MCD, DUSIB, DSIIDC, DTL, I&FC, DAMB and DTC. The Tier-I examination for the said post was conducted from 27.06.2022 to 29.06.2022, in which the applicants duly participated. The respondent declared the Tier-I result on 20.07.2023, whereby the applicants were provisionally shortlisted for the Tier-II examination.

2.3. Prior to the present recruitment, DSSSB had issued Circular dated 19.06.2019 and subsequently a Revised Waiting Panel Policy dated 02.08.2021 in compliance with the binding judgments of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board v. Lokesh Kumar & Ors. (WP(C) 5236/2012) and Amit Kumar & Anr. v. GNCTD & Ors. (WP(C) 3560/2016), whereby the respondent was directed to prepare a waiting/reserve panel of candidates securing above the minimum qualifyi