Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 1687

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member, Ram Mohan Johri, Administrative Member
Abhishake Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory of J&K – Respondent
Original Application Nos. 1279/2025 & 1656/2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Kamal Mangotra
For the Respondents: Mr. Rajesh Thappa, AAG

No entitlement to correct category in online recruitment forms after edit window closure and exam; finality of submitted application sacrosanct for transparency and equality, preventing floodgates of claims.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Recruitment process - Online application forms - Category correction - Candidates applied for constable posts with horizontal reservations for serving personnel but due to errors in form filling via cyber cafés, categories were wrongly indicated (open merit instead of entitled category in one case, wrong subcategory in another) - Edit window provided but not availed - Post-written exam requests for rectification denied - No provision or entitlement for post-deadline category change after closure of application and edit window; recruitment terms binding, finality of submitted form sacrosanct to ensure transparency, equality and integrity - Allowing changes would open floodgates, prejudice compliant candidates and disturb selection algorithm - Candidates bound by declared particulars, participation in process precludes later challenge - Applications dismissed. (Paras 13, 14, 16, 18, 22)

(B) Service Law - Horizontal reservation - Operates within vertical categories; correct identification of vertical and horizontal sub-category at application stage essential - Post-submission alteration impermissible as it impacts cut-offs, pools and rights of others - Equal treatment under Article 14 mandates uniform application of rules. (Paras 17, 16)

Facts of the case:
Applicants, entitled to horizontal reservations as serving personnel, submitted online forms for constable recruitment with category errors due to cyber café operators - one shown under open merit instead of entitled subcategory, another under wrong subcategory - Scored above reserved cut-offs but below open merit; not shortlisted or wrongly processed - Sought post-exam rectification, denied by selection board citing finality of forms and non-use of edit window.

Findings of Court:
No legal right to post-deadline category correction; action of board consistent with recruitment rules, not arbitrary.

Issues: Whether bona fide errors in online category selection entitle candidates to rectification after edit window closure and written exam; impact on selection integrity.

Ratio Decidendi: Courts/tribunals cannot rewrite recruitment conditions or permit category changes post-deadline merely on sympathetic grounds; terms of advertisement binding, finality of application essential for fairness in mass recruitments; no interference absent illegality (Paras 13-22).

Result: Both Original Applications dismissed.

Table of Content
1. applicants seek category rectification for reservations. (Para 1 , 2)
2. respondents defend finality of application forms. (Para 3)
3. recruitment process and category errors detailed. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
4. parties contend on post-deadline corrections. (Para 11 , 12)
5. rules bind recruitment; no post-edit changes allowed. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
6. applicants fail cut-offs; reprocessing impermissible. (Para 19 , 20 , 21)
7. applications dismissed for lack of merit. (Para 22 , 23 , 24)

ORDER

Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member

1. The applicant has filed the present Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs: -

OA 1279/2025

a) Commanding the respondent No. 2 to rectify the application form by including the reserved category of the applicants and consider the name of the applicants' vis-à-vis reserved category for SPOs which was advertised vide advertisement no. 01 of 2024 dated 16-07-2024.

b) Direct the respondent no.2 to extend all the consequential benefits, including reservation benefits, to the petitioner in the selection process for the post of constable.

c) Any other order, command or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the given facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents.

OA 1656/2025

a) Commanding the respondent No. 2 to rectify the application form by including the reserved category of the applicant and consider the name of the applicants' vis-à-vis reserved category for Homeguard (VHG) which was advertised vide advertisement no. 01 of 2024 dated 16-07-2024.

b) Direct the respondent no.2 to extend all the consequential benefits, including reservation benefits, to the petitioner in the selection process for the post of constable.

2. The common facts of the case as averred by the applicants in both the OAs are as follows: -

a) Both the Original Applications arise out of the same recruitment process initiated by respondent No.2 for the post of Constable in the Union Territory cadre and involve an identical issue relating to non-consideration of the applicants under their respective horizontal reserved categories due to inadvertent errors committed at the stage of filling up the online application forms.

b) In O.A. No. 1279/2025, the applicants were appointed as Special Police Officers (SPOs) in the Police Department on 24.06.2017 and 16.02.2019 respectively and are continuing in service, one being posted at District Police Lines, Jammu and the other at Police Station Samba. Valid SPO certificates were issued in their favour by the competent authority. In O.A. No. 1656/2025, the applicant was appointed as a Home Guard (VHG) in the Home Department on 19.08.2020 and is presently working under the disposal of the Area Commandant, Home Guards, Poonch, and holds a valid Home Guard certificate issued by the competent authority.

c) Respondent No.2 issued Advertisement Notification No. 01 of 2024 dated 16.07.2024 inviting online applications for recruitment to the post of Constable in the UT cadre. The advertisement provided for horizontal reservation for different categories, including 15% reservation for SPOs and 4% reservation for Home Guards (VHG). All the applicants in both the Original Applications were fully eligible and possessed the requisite qualifications as prescribed under the advertisement.

d) It is the common case of the applicants that the online application forms were filled through Cyber Cafés, as the applicants were not well-versed with computer operations. All relevant documents, including the respective category certificates, were handed over to the Cyber Café operators. However, due to inadvertent and bona fide clerical

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 1687

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALRajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member, Ram Mohan Johri, Administrative MemberAbhishake Sharma – AppellantVersusUnion Territory of J&K – RespondentOriginal Application Nos. 1279/2025 & 1656/2025

No entitlement to correct category in online recruitment forms after edit window closure and exam; finality of submitted application sacrosanct for transparency and equality, preventing floodgates of claims.

Cases Referred (3)

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member, Ram Mohan Johri, Administrative Member
Abhishake Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory of J&K – Respondent
Original Application Nos. 1279/2025 & 1656/2025