CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH: NEW DELHI O.A. No. 1562/2022 Reserved on: 11.12.2025 Pronounced on: 15.12.2025 Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)

Hon’ble Dr. Anand S. Khati, Member (A)

Mehjabeen, Aged about 27 years, D/o Sh. Mubeen, R/o H. No. 4005, 2nd Floor, Gali Khan Khana Jama Masjid, Delhi- 110006, Post: TGT (Urdu) (Female), Post Code: 53/21, Group-B.

…Applicant (By Advocates: Mr. Anuj Aggarwal with Mr. Nikhil Pawar, Mr. Shubham Bahl, Mr. Shakib Malik and Ms.

Tanya Rose)

Versus

1. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB), Through its Chairman Govt. ofNCT of Delhi, FC-18, Institutional Area, Karkardooma, Delhi-110092 Email: dsssb-secy@nic.in

2. Govt. of NCT of Delhi Through its Director of Education Directorate of Education, Old Secretariat Building, Civil Lines, Delhi-11 0054 Email ID: diredu@hub.nic.in, diredu@nic.in

3. Director of Local Bodies Through its Director, Govt. of NCT of Delhi

9th Level, C-Wing, Delhi Sachivalaya I P Estate, New Delhi-11 0002 …Respondents (By Advocate: Mr. Amit Anand)

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

By way of the present O.A. the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:-

"(i) Set aside the impugned Rejection Notice No. 865 dated 17.05.2022, issued by the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB), whereby at Sr. No. 04, the candidature of the applicant for appointment to the post of TGT (Urdu) (Female) (Post Code: 53/21) in the Directorate of Education was rejected with the remarks:

“CTET not done as on cutoff date. She has qualified CTET on 09.03.2022 which is after cutoff date. The candidate has admitted that at the time of applying for the post, she had not CTET qualification. Hence, rejected for having CTET after cutoff date”;

(ii) Direct the respondents to treat the CTET certificate dated 09.03.2022, as possessed by the applicant, as a valid qualification for appointment to the post of TGT (Urdu) (Female) (Post Code: 53/21) without insisting on the condition that the CTET must be passed/qualified prior to the cutoff date, i.e., 03.07.2021;

(iii) Declare that the applicant is duly qualified and fulfills all the requisite qualifications for appointment to the post of TGT (Urdu) (Female) (Post Code: 53/21) in the Directorate of Education;

(iv) Direct the respondents to consider the candidature of the applicant for appointment to the post of TGT (Urdu) (Female) (Post Code: 53/21) with all consequential benefits (monetary as well as non-monetary);

(v) Allow the present Original Application with costs in favor of the applicant; and (vi) Issue any other appropriate order or direction as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and in favor of the applicant.”

2. Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant, an otherwise fully qualified and meritorious candidate for the post of TGT (Urdu) (Female), Post Code 53/21, was arbitrarily rejected by DSSSB vide Rejection Notice No. 865 dated 17.05.2022 solely on the ground that she had acquired her CTET qualification on 09.03.2022, i.e., after the notified cut-off date of 03.07.2021.

2.1. Learned counsel contended that the insistence on possession of CTET as on the cut-off date was unjust, especially when the applicant fulfilled all other essential qualifications and when acute shortage of Urdu teachers in Delhi Government schools was adversely affecting the fundamental right to education of students under Article

21A.

2.2. Learned counsel submitted that the Directorate of Education possessed ample power to relax the CTET requirement in deserving cases, and failure to exercise such power, despite the applicant’s eligibility, merit, and dire financial circumstances, rendered the rejection illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution as well as the objectives of the Right to Education Act, 2009. It was thus argued by learned counsel that the OA had been filed seeking quashing of the reje