Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi O.A. No. 1572/2020 Reserved on :- 03.02.2026 Pronounced on:- 12.02.2026 Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)

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

Sourav Saini, S/o Surat Singh Saini R/o 33, Naharpur, Sector-7, Rohini, North-West, Delhi-110085 , M. 9560159887.

...Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Pardeep Gupta)

Versus

1. Govt. of NCT of Delhi Through its Chief Secretary

5th Level, A Wing, Delhi Secretariat , IP Estate, New Delhi Served Through csdelhi@nic.in Tel: 011-233921

00

2. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board Through its Secretary, F-18, Karkardooma Institutional Area New Delhi

3. Department of Social Welfare Through Its Director Govt. of NCT of Delhi GLNS Complex, Delhi Gate New Delhi-110002 Served through: Email: dsw@nic.in Tel: 011-23314810.

…Respondents (By Advocates: Mr. Amit Yadv with Dr. Monika Bhargava, Ms.

Yogita for Mr. Jagdish N.)

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

In the present Original Application, the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:

“(I) Order No. F1/416/CC-11/DSSSB/2020/8660-68 dated 06.03.2020 passed by Respondent No. 2.

(II) Set aside the following condition No. 9, if need be, of Notice No. 880 dated 23.01.2020 as violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

(III) Respondents be directed to consider and allow the representation dated 26.02.2020 for submitting the copies of the required documents in terms of the judgment dated 29.10.2018 in O.A. No. 4042/2017 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench at New Delhi; and (IV) Respondents be directed to accept the documents of the Applicant in hard copy, verify them and, if the Applicant is found eligible as per his merit, then recommend his claim for appropriate appointment to the user department to the post of Welfare Officer in terms of Advertisement No. 02/2019 dated

29.01.2019.

(V) The Respondents be directed to maintain the merit/seniority list of the Applicant along with his batch mates with all consequential benefits.”

2. Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant, having successfully cleared the written examination for the Post Code 14/19 (Welfare Officer) with 117.75 marks and having been duly shortlisted, acquired a valuable and vested right to consideration for appointment, which has been illegally and arbitrarily snatched away by the respondents solely on hyper-technical and procedural grounds.

2.1. Learned counsel further submitted that the rejection of the applicant’s candidature vide impugned notice dated 06.03.2020 on the ground that the applicant has not submitted the requisite documents before 11.02.2020 is wholly unsustainable, as the applicant had submitted all requisite documents through a duly acknowledged representation dated 26.02.2020 with only a minor delay of nine days, which was occasioned due to non-receipt of the mandatory SMS intimation assured under Clause 9 of the circular dated

23.01.2020.

2.2. Learned counsel contended that time was never the essence of the selection process, as the respondents themselves granted extensions to similarly placed candidates, including OBC candidates securing identical marks, even up to August 2020, thereby rendering the action against the applicant discriminatory, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

2.3. Learned counsel further contended that the impugned condition regarding e-dossier submission was not part of the original advertisement or examination process and has been selectively and inconsistently applied. The applicant’s documents were already in possession of the respondents prior to the declaration of results, and the rejection was passed despite the nationwide COVID-19 lockdown and the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s order extending limitation vide order dated 23.03.2020 in Suo Moto Writ Petition No. 3/2020.

2.4. Learned counsel argued that the case of the applicant is squarely covered by the judgment dat