Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi This the 16th day of February, 2026 Hon’ble Dr. Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A)

Hon’ble Sh. Rajveer Singh Verma, Member (J)

1. Kartik Saini, (Roll No.412016000221)

S/o Sh. Ram Saran Saini, Aged about 28 years, R/o H.No.1609/115, Ganesh Pura A, Tri Nagar, New Delhi-110035.

Group-C

2. Vinay Kumar Gupta, (Roll No.411016001408)

S/o Sh. Fulena Gupta, Aged about 32 years, R/o Vill. Deoria, P.S. Mahuadih, Baitalpur, Gotha Rasulpur, Deoria, Uttar Pradesh-274201.

Group-C

3. Himanshu Bansal, (Roll No.319016001374)

S/o Sh. Chander Bhushan, Aged about 34 years, R/o E-126, Patel Nagar, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh-201001.

Group-C -Applicants (By Advocate: Mr. Sudhir Nagar and Mr. Arun Kumar Nagar)

Versus

1. Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC), Through its Managing Director, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, I.P. Estate, New Delhi.

2. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB), Through Its Secretary, FC-18, Institutional Area, Karkardooma, Delhi-110092. -Respondents (By Advocate: Mr. Pradeep Kumar Singh)

ORDER (Oral)

By Dr. Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A)

1. Present OA was initially filed by the applicants, three in number, under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking following relief:

“A. Quash and set aside the impugned letters dated 03.04.2023 whereby the provisional selection and candidatures of the applicants have been cancelled, by declaring the said impugned letters to be illegal, arbitrary, null and void.

B. To declare that the applicants possesses minimum educational qualifications as prescribed for the post of ‘Labour Welfare Inspector’ and consequently, direct the respondent no.1 to appoint the applicants to the said post of Labour Welfar Inspector, Post Code 16/20, advertised vide Advt. No.01/20 in view of their performance on merits in the recruitment examination.

C. Pass any such orders as the Court may deem fit in the light of the above-mentioned facts and circumstances of the case.”

1.1 However, when the matter was taken up today for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the applicants, on instructions, states that though three applicants have filed this application, applicant Nos.1 and 3 are not interested to pursue the present OA but he is insisting the relief in respect of applicant No.2, Mr. Vinay Kumar Gupta. This OA, is therefore, maintained only in respect of applicant No.2.

2. Factual Matrix

2.1 Respondent No.2 – DSSSB vide advertisement No.01/20 published the advertisement on 01.01.2020 for various posts including the post of Labour Welfare Inspector, Post Code- 16/20. The examination was conducted on 30.11.2021 and results were declared on 01.06.2022. The applicant No.2, i.e., Vinay Kumar Gupta was one of the successful candidates. The applicant was called for document verification on 06.10.2022. The applicant appeared on 06.10.2022 and submitted his documents. However, he was not declared as one of the candidates for offer of appointment. He submitted representations to the respondents. The candidature of the applicant was rejected on 03.04.2023 stating that the applicant does not possess the requisite qualifications. Being aggrieved, he has filed the present OA seeking aforementioned relief.

3. Pursuant to the notices issued by the Tribunal, the respondents entered their appearance and filed their respective reply, to which no rejoinder has been filed by the applicant.

4. Submission by Learned Counsel for Applicant

4.1 Learned counsel for the applicant states that the advertisement dated 01.01.2020 contained the following essential and desirable qualification for the post of Labour Welfare Inspector (Post Code 16/20):-

“Essential: Graduate in one of the Social Sciences preferably in Sociology.

Desirable: Post Graduate Diploma in social science from a recognized Institute.”

4.2 He further states that Sh. Vinay Kumar Gupta, applicant No.2 has the following qualifications:

“B.A. in Psychology, M.A. Sociology, M Phil Sociology, PGD Labour Law and Industrial Relations.”

4.3