A trivial and inadvertent error in an online application form, which does not result in any material benefit to the candidate and where the candidate otherwise meets all eligibility criteria, should not be a ground for rejection of candidature.

O R D E R

PER: MRS. RASHMI SAXENA SAHNI, MEMBER (A)

1. Present original application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking following relief:-

a. Direct the respondents to appoint the applicant on the post of Daksewak Nangloi (SO) New Delhi, West Division, being eligible as per notification No.17-67/2023-GDS dated 31.07.2023.

b. Direct the respondents to reserve one post of Daksewak Nangloi (SO) New Delhi, West Division, during the pendency of the present petition.

2. Briefly stated the factual matrix is as follows. Respondent No. 1 vide advertisement dated 31.07.2023 invited applications for the post of Daksewaks. The applications were required to be submitted online. The qualifications for the post of Daksewak was Secondary School Examination (10th Standard) Certificate by any recognized board of School Education by the Government of India/State Government/Union Territory (UT) in which compulsory subjects were English and Maths. Further, the Daksewaks were required to have studied the local language and reside within the delivery jurisdiction of the Post Office (S.O) concerned (Annexure A-1). Since the applicant was eligible as per the criteria, he applied for the post of Daksewak (SC Category) under the New Delhi, West Division, Nangloi (S.O) vide Registration No-HR683A213D87B4. On 15.11.2023, being eligible, applicant was offered appointment as a Daksewak, Nangloi (S.O), New Delhi, West Division. The applicant appeared before the department concerned along with the medical certificate, community certificate and matriculation certificate. The Respondent No.2., Superintendent of Post Offices, Sonepat Division, rejected the candidature of the applicant on the ground that SSC Certificate (Matriculation Certificate) uploaded does not tally with the education board selected online (Annexure A-6).

3. The applicant gave a representation to the department explaining that he had inadvertently clicked on ICSE Board, whereas he had uploaded the certificate of Board of Education, Haryana and therefore he had no malafide intentions and even otherwise he fulfilled all the criteria required as per advertisement (Annexure A-7). According to applicant, marks in the subjects were correctly uploaded and error occurred, inadvertently, as due to multiple options for various Boards, he chose ISCE Board instead of Board of School Education, Haryana.

4. Respondents have filed written statement dated 08.02.2024 submitting that in response to the advertisement dated 31.07.2023, the applicant applied for the post of Dak Sevak Nangloi SO under New Delhi West Division in Delhi Circle in the online recruitment for engagement as GDS. The applicant, at the time of applying for the said post, had the option to select any Divisional Head all over India as his document verifying Authority (VA) which can be the authority other than the Engaging Authority. Accordingly, the applicant opted the Answering Respondent No. 2, as his Verifying Authority (VA) although the Engaging Authority in respect of the post for which he had applied was Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Delhi West Division under Delhi Circle which is under the jurisdiction of CAT Bench New Delhi. Therefore, respondents have taken preliminary objection that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the present case as the jurisdiction of the OA lies with Principal CAT