Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench: New Delhi O.A. No.1272/2022 This the 11th day of February, 2026 Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)

Hon’ble Dr. Anand S Khati, Member (A)

Lokesh Kumar S/o Rajender Kumar Aged about 33 Years R/o L-242, Shastri Nagar Delhi-110052 Delhi – 110052, Post-Senior Scientific Officer Group – B.

2. Deepika Tiwari D/o S.K.Tiwari R/o 1329, Avadhpuri Colony, Beniganj, Faizabad Uttar Pradesh-224001, Post-Senior Scientific Officer Group – B …Applicants (None)

Versus Union Public Service Commission (Through Chairman) Dholpur House, Shahjahan Road, New Delhi.:- 110069 Forensic Science Laboratory Through Director Government of NCT of Delhi Sector-14, Rohini New Delhi-110085 …Respondents (By Advocates : Mr. S N Verma;

Mr. Amit Yadav with Mr. Lekh Raj Singh)

ORDER (ORAL)

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

On 11.08.2025, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the present matter can be disposed of in terms of the decision rendered in OA No. 1444/2022 & connected matters, and a last opportunity was granted to the learned counsel for the applicant to address arguments. However, there is no representation on behalf of the applicant even in the revised call.

2. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the present Original Application has been filed challenging the scrutiny/shortlisting process adopted by the Union Public Service Commission for the post of Senior Scientific Officer (Biology) pursuant to Advertisement No. 07/2020. He submits that the issue raised in the present O.A. is identical to the issue involved in O.A. No. 1444/2022 (along with O.A. No. 1225/2022), wherein the challenge was to the shortlisting criteria adopted by the UPSC, particularly the enhancement of experience criteria and insistence upon possession of the desirable qualification (Doctorate Degree) for the purpose of shortlisting.

3. The said O.A. No. 1444/2022 has already been adjudicated and dismissed by a detailed order dated 16.07.2024, wherein this Tribunal upheld the shortlisting criteria adopted by the UPSC and declined to interfere with the scrutiny process.

4. For the sake of brevity, order dated 16.07.2024 passed in O.A. No. 1444/2022 (along with O.A. No.

1225/2022) is reproduced as under:-

“The facts and issue raised in both these OAs being similar, we propose to dispose of them by this common order.

2. The applicants are Bachelors and Masters of Science in respective disciplines. Except the sole applicant in OA No.1444/2022 (applicant No.1 in OA No.1225/2022) they claim to have been working with respondent No.3 for more than seven years as Scientific Assistant (Biology) on contractual basis. The applicant No.1 is working as Scientific Assistant (Biology) in permanent capacity. The applicants also claim that they are eligible for appointment to the post of Senior Scientific Officer (Biology).

3. The 1st respondent issued advertisement No.7/2020 for recruitment by selection inter alia to the post of Senior Scientific Officer (Biology) with the respondent No.3. The total vacancies advertised were six in number (ST-1 and UR-5). The post in question is a Group ‘A’ Gazetted Non-Ministerial post under the Government of NCT of Delhi.

4. It is the case of the applicants that the 1st respondent, UPSC, issued the impugned scrutiny notice dated 17.03.2022 wherein it has adopted an illegal and arbitrary criteria to shortlist the candidates for six posts of Senior Scientific Officer (Biology). It is further the case of the applicants that the respondent No.1, by making a desirable qualification under the recruitment rules a mandatory criteria and thereby rejecting the candidature of the applicants on this ground alone, has acted contrary to the recruitment rules. The 1st respondent vide the aforesaid notice also granted time to the candidates to make representations submitting their objections to the shortlisting criteria. The applicants filed their respective representations objecting to the shortlisting criteria since th