Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench: New Delhi O.A. No.4960/2025 This the 09^th day of January, 2026 Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)

Hon’ble Mr. Rajinder Kashyap, Member (A)

Kaushal Sharma, Aged- 25 Years, S/o Sh. Ram Avtar Shanna, R/o Mohalla Holi Chowk Jewar Post Jewar, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, Pin-203l35 …Applicant (By Advocates: Mr. Yogesh Sharma)

Versus

1. Union of India through The Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Department of Personnel and Training, Staff Selection Commission, Govt. of India, Block No.12, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003

2. The Staff Selection Commission, Through its' Secretary (Headquarter), Block No.12, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003

3. The Regional Director, Staff Selection Commission (Northern Region), 5th Floor, Block No.12, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003

4. The Director General, Archeological Survey of India, 24, Tilak Marg, New Delhi.

…Respondents (By Advocate : Mr. T. N. Tripathi)

ORDER (ORAL)

By Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)

In the present Original Application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant seeks the following reliefs:

“(i) That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass an order declaring to the effect the action of the respondent No.2 & 3 not forwarding the Dossier of the applicant to the respondent No.4 is totally illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory and consequently, pass an order directing the respondent No.2 & 3 to forward the Dossier of the applicant for the post of MTS immediately to the respondent No.4.

(ii) That the Hon'ble Tribunal may further graciously be pleased to pass an order directing the respondent No.4 to issue an appointment order to the applicant after receiving the Dossier of the applicant with all consequential benefit from the date of appointment of other similarly situated and junior persons of the applicant including pay fixation and seniority etc., (iii) Any other relief which the Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit and proper may also be granted to the applicant along with the costs of litigation.”

2. Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicant seeks directions to the respondents regarding the delayed appointment of the applicant to the post of Multi-Tasking (Non-Technical) Staff (MTS) pursuant to the Multi-Tasking (Non- Technical) Staff and Havaldar (CBIC & CBN)

Examination, 2024.

3. The core grievance articulated by learned counsel for the applicant is the inaction on the part of Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, namely the Staff Selection Commission, in forwarding the applicant’s dossier to the allocated user department, i.e., the Archaeological Survey of India (Respondent No. 4).

4. Learned counsel for the applicant draws our attention to the RTI replies annexed with the OA. It is an undisputed fact that the applicant fulfilled all eligibility criteria and appeared in the written examination held on 24.10.2024 bearing Roll No. 2201127576. The applicant was provisionally shortlisted for document verification and subsequent appointment, securing Rank 415.

5. A crucial aspect highlighted is the contradictory information received by the applicant. While the Staff Selection Commission, vide RTI reply dated 01.12.2025, informed the applicant that his e-dossier was “being forwarded to the Department in due course”, the Archaeological Survey of India subsequently informed him that his dossier had “not been received from SSC”. The applicant contends that such delay is arbitrary and discriminatory, particularly when other similarly situated candidates have already joined their respective posts.

6. We further note from the Record of Proceedings dated 23.12.2025 that one post of MTS has been kept vacant pending disposal of the present O.A.

7. Be that as it may, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and the seemingly inequitable treatment meted out to the applicant, who is otherwise a selected and eligible candidate,