Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 451

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A), Rajveer Singh Verma, Member (J)
Parikshit Grewal – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
O.A./51/2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:Ms. Arundhati Katju, Sr. Advocate assisted by Ms. Anushree Kapadia, Mr. M.D.Tripathi Reddy, Ms. Shristi
For the Respondents: Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Sr. counsel, Mr. Anand Singh, Mr. Ajesh Luthra, Mr. Yogesh Mahur, Mr. J.S.Mann, Mr. Harkesh Parashar, Mr. Harpreet, Mr. Amit Anand, Mr. S.K.Gupta, Ms. Rinkey Negi, Mr. S.N.Verma, Ms. Illashree

Minor technical irregularities in recruitment exams, promptly rectified without systemic fraud or inability to segregate tainted/untainted candidates, do not vitiate entire selection process.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Recruitment process - Examiner of Patents & Designs Group-A (Gazetted) - Alleged irregularities including lack of public notice for re-examination, ambiguity in negative marking, absence of normalization between two phases of main examination, special re-examination for one candidate, and withholding of results - Tribunal held that irregularities were minor technical glitches promptly rectified by conducting agency through emails, calls, and voice blasts; no normalization required as same question paper used and difficulty levels uniform across phases; no systemic failure undermining integrity of process warranting cancellation - Entire selection process not vitiated; minor aberrations do not justify quashing entire recruitment. (Paras 10.1 to 10.10)

(B) Service Law - Examination irregularities - Principles for cancellation - Entire process cancelled only if systemic malaise or fraud proven with reasonable certainty, making segregation of tainted/untainted impossible; innocent candidates not to suffer for wrongdoers; proportionality in response to malpractices essential; minor procedural lapses attracting corrective measures do not vitiate sanctity. (Paras 10.9)

Facts of the case:
Applicants challenged recruitment for 553 vacancies alleging vitiation due to: no public notice for main exam re-scheduled on 05.02.2024 (only 258/1037 affected candidates appeared); negative marking confusion on screens (rectified on-spot); no normalization between exams on 25.01.2024 and 05.02.2024; one candidate re-examined post-results due to lost answer sheet; 239 results withheld (later clarified as PwD category). Process conducted by agency after prior exam cancellation; representations addressed via reasoned order not challenged; appointments issued post-final results.

Findings of Court:
Irregularities not pervasive or systemic; corrective actions ensured fairness; normalization scheme applied to disciplines, not exam dates; applicants not among affected re-exam candidates and failed to show personal prejudice; preliminary objections on maintainability overruled.

Issues: Whether alleged irregularities constituted systemic failure vitiating entire process; need for public notice vs individual communications; applicability of normalization across exam phases; impact of isolated re-exam and withheld results on integrity.

Ratio Decidendi: Minor technical errors rectified promptly do not undermine exam sanctity unless proven as widespread fraud; segregation possible here with no candidate malpractices; distinguishing cases of pervasive irregularities, process upheld as fair and transparent.

Result: OA dismissed.

Table of Content
1. factual background of recruitment process and prior proceedings (Para 1 , 2)
2. applicants allege systemic irregularities vitiating selection (Para 4)
3. nta defends corrective actions for minor technical issues (Para 5)
4. private respondents raise maintainability objections (Para 7)
5. irregularities not systemic; process integrity maintained (Para 10)
6. oa dismissed; no vitiation of selection process (Para 11 , 12)

ORDER By Dr. Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A)

Present OA has been filed by the applicants under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking following relief:

“(i) That the Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass an order directing the Respondents to cancel the examinations held on 21.12.2023 (Preliminary), 25.01.2024 and 05.02.2024 (Mains Examination), and Interview conducted from 01.04.2024 to 27.04.2024 for the post of ‘Examiner of Patents & Designs’ Group-A (Gazetted) under the Recruitment Notification – 2023;

(ii) Quash the Preliminary Examination dated 21.12.2023 and Mains Examination dated 25.01.2024 and 05.02.2024 conducted by Respondent No.2 for the post of ‘Examiner of Patents & Designs’ Group-A (Gazetted) under the Recruitment Notification – 2023;

(iii) Direct the Respondents to conduct Fresh Pre and Mains as well as Interview for the posts of 553 vacancies of the Examiner of Patents & Designs Group-A (Gazetted) under the Recruitment Notification so as to safeguard the fairness and integrity of examinations. And/or (iv) Any other relief as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper be also granted to the Applicants along with the costs of litigation.”

2. Factual Matrix

2.1 Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (CGPDTM), Department of Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India issued recruitment notification dated 07.07.2023 for recruitment of ‘Examiner of Patents & Designs’ Group-A (Gazetted) for

553 vacancies. Initially, the examination was supposed to be conducted by Quality Council of India (QCI), a non-profit autonomous society registered under Societies Registration Act XXI of 1860. Due to some irregularities/technical glitches in the Preliminary Examination-1 held on 03.09.2023 was cancelled, which was conducted by QCI. Subsequently, the National Testing Agency (NTA), respondent No.1 in the present OA, issued a public notice dated 11.12.2023 stating that it has been entrusted to conduct recruitment for the aforementioned positions comprising Preliminary Examination, Main Examination and Interview.

2.2 The respondent No.1 issued public notice on 16.12.2023 for informing release of admit cards to the candidates on 21.12.2023. The preliminary examination was conducted by NTA. The result of the preliminary examination was declared and NTA declared the result of preliminary examination as conducted on 21.12.2023 in the course of 3-4 days w.e.f. 10.01.2024. Starting from 20.01.2024 to 24.01.2024, NTA - respondent No.1, released the admit cards for Main Examination. The main examination was conducted on 25.01.2024. Vide notification dated

02.02.2024, NTA notified for conducting re- examination for main examination on 05.02.2024 for those affected candidates who missed the Main Examination on 25.01.2024 for the technical glitch regarding the mis-match of centres mentioned in the admit card. The respondent No.1, i.e. NTA conducted the re-scheduled Main examination for these candidates on 05.02.2024. The respondents, after the conduct of the re-scheduled Main examination on 05.02.2024, issued a Public Notice on 26.02.2024 regarding such re-examination. Regarding the mis- match of centres as well as negative marking and mis- communication regarding negative marking in some centres not conducting normalization for the two Main examinations conducted on two separate dates, i.e. on 25.01.2024 and 05.02.2024 and other alleged irregularities approached the Apex court in Writ Petition (Civil) No.120/2024. The sa

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 451

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALChhabilendra Roul, Member (A), Rajveer Singh Verma, Member (J)Parikshit Grewal – AppellantVersusUnion Of India – RespondentO.A./51/2025

Minor technical irregularities in recruitment exams, promptly rectified without systemic fraud or inability to segregate tainted/untainted candidates, do not vitiate entire selection process.

Cases Referred (2)

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A), Rajveer Singh Verma, Member (J)
Parikshit Grewal – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
O.A./51/2025