Inordinate 9-year recruitment gap justifies provisional participation for overage candidates with pending relaxation representations, without indefeasible appointment right, pending case-to-case decision under relaxation rule.

ORDER (ORAL)

Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J):-

ORDER (ORAL)

Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J):-

M.A. No. 1385/2026 in O.A. No. 1061/2026

The present M.A. is filed seeking permission of joining together in a single application.

2. For the reasons stated therein, the M.A. No.1385/2026 is allowed.

M.A. No. 1458/2026 in O.A. No. 1122/2026

The present M.A. is filed seeking permission to join together in a single application.

2. For the reasons stated therein, the M.A. No.1485/2026 is allowed.

O.A. No. 1061/2026 with O.A. No. 1105/2026, O.A. No. 1122/2026

Prayer is made to a limited aspect that the representations are pending before the Competent Authority regarding age relaxation as a one-time measure, and provisionally they may be allowed to participate in the selection process in as the advertisements have been issued after gap of 9 years from last advertisment for post in question. The time was sought by respondents twice to take appropriate instructions in regard. However, the respondents have not submitted any documents to contest the issue. Whereas the applicant expressed that the last date to apply shall expire on 25.03.2026.

Since a common question of facts and law is involved in the present batch of OAs, they are being disposed of through this common order. However, for the sake of brevity, the facts are being extracted from O.A. No.1061/2026 and the same is taken as the lead case in the present matter.

2. In the Original Application No.1061/2026, filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicants have prayed for the following reliefs:

“a) Quash Advertisement Vacancy Notice No. 01/2026, Combined Examinations, dated 20.02.2026, (Annexure-A/1) issued by the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board, insofar as it relates to the post of Grade-II (GNCTDSS)/Assistant Section Officer under Post Code 804/26, to the extent that it enforces the upper age limit of 30 years as on 25.03.2026 without providing any appropriate one-time age relaxation to the present Applicants;

b) Hold and declare that the omission and inaction of the Respondents in not granting an appropriate one-time age relaxation to the present Applicants in relation to the aforesaid recruitment are arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India;)

c) Direct the Respondents to grant an appropriate one-time age relaxation of upto five years to the present Applicants in relation to the recruitment for the post of Grade-II (GNCTDSS)/Assistant Section Officer under Post Code 804/26; and

d) Pass such other or further order(s) as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

3. Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants intended to apply for the post of Grade-II (GNCTDSS)/Assistant Section Officer (formerly known as DASS). He submits that the previous recruitment to the said post was conducted in the year 2017 and, prior thereto, in 2013. The present recruitment has been initiated only in 2026, after an inordinate gap of nearly nine years. It has been further submitted that the respondents cannot permit such a prolonged hiatus and thereafter apply the prescribed age criteria mechanically, as if the passage of time has no bearing on the eligibility of aspirants. By the time the present recruitment notification was issued in 2026, many eligible candidates from earlier cycles had crossed the upper age limit of 30 years. Thus, the delay on the part of the respondents has effectively deprived such candidates of an opportunity both in the earlier cycle an