Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 4158

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Ritu Tagore, J, Prasant Kumar, Administrative Member
Stanzin Dolkar – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory of Ladakh – Respondent
O.A. No. 976/2025 | OA 1012 OF 2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Akhail Ahmad Bardi
For the Respondents: S N Ratanpuri, Mahapara Ali, Fiza

Where recruitment rules contain an explicit relaxation clause, the appointing authority must objectively and reasonably consider representations for relaxation of qualifications, and failure to do so warrants judicial intervention to ensure administrative fairness.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 16 - Recruitment Rules - Lecturer post - Essential Qualification - Requirement of B.Ed. for Ph.D. holders - Challenge to advertisement - Whether arbitrary and discriminatory.

(B) Recruitment - Power of Relaxation - Existence of relaxation clause in recruitment rules/advertisement - Duty of authority to consider representations for relaxation in a reasoned and objective manner - Judicial review limited to ensuring administrative fairness and consideration of merit.

Facts of the case:
The applicants, all Ph.D. holders, challenged the recruitment advertisements and rules prescribed for the post of Lecturer in the School Education Department, Union Territory of Ladakh, which mandated a B.Ed. degree as an essential qualification. They argued that their higher academic qualifications should exempt them from the B.Ed. requirement.

Findings of Court:
The Court held that while the prescription of qualifications is a policy matter, the existence of a relaxation clause in the recruitment rules and advertisement created an obligation for the respondents to consider individual cases for relaxation. The Court found that there was no evidence that the representations submitted by the applicants were considered in a reasoned and objective manner pursuant to the relaxation provision.

Issues: Whether the mandatory requirement of B.Ed. for Ph.D. holders is arbitrary and whether the authorities are bound to consider requests for relaxation where such a provision exists in the rules.

Ratio Decidendi: Though Ph.D. and B.Ed. operate in distinct fields and automatic equivalence cannot be assumed, the existence of a specific relaxation clause obliges the appointing authority to apply their mind to meritorious cases rather than acting with absolute rigidity. Arbitrariness arises when such specific provisions for relaxation are ignored without reasoned consideration.

Result: Original Applications disposed of with a direction to the UPSC and authorities to consider and decide the applicants' request for qualification relaxation via a reasoned and speaking order.

Table of Content
1. challenge to mandatory b.ed. requirement for ph.d. holders. (Para 1 , 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. applicants' contention regarding higher qualifications and previous exemptions. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. respondents' reliance on ncte pedagogical norms and expert discretion. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
4. scope of judicial review and scope of pedagogical qualifications versus research degrees. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22)
5. availability and necessity of applying the relaxation clause. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27)
6. directive to authorities to consider relaxation on merits. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33)

1.Dr. Stanzin Dolkar D /o Tsering Jigmat, R/o

Fokar, Kargil ~ 194103, Age: 32 | Ph.D.

2.Dr. Mohd Hassan S/o Habibulla, R/o Yourbaltak,

Kargil 194103, Age: 31 | Ph.D.

3. Dr. Mohd Arif S/o Mohd Abdullah, R/o Kaksar,

Kargil - 194103, Age: 32 | Ph.D.

4.Dr. Gulzar Hussain S/o Ghulam Mehdi, R/o

Goma, Kargil ~ 194103, Age: 35 | Ph.D.

5.Dr. Hadi Ali S/o Mohd Bagir, R/o Akchamal,

Kargil - 194103, Age: 33 | Ph.D.

6. Dr. Mohd Sharif S/o Mohd Abdullah, R/o Baroo,

Kargil - 194103, Age: 33 | Ph.D.

7.Dr. Basharat Ali S/o Mohd Issa, R/o

Kurbathang, Kargil ~ 194103, Age: 33 | Ph.D.

8. Dr. Ahmad Ali S/o Mohd Hassan, R/o Choskore,

Kargil - 194103, Age: 34 | Ph.D.

9.Dr. Irfan Qadir S/o Abdul Qadir, R/o Norgaisling,

Kargil, Age: 36 | Ph.D.

10.Dr. Nasir Mehdi Malik S /0 Mohd Ali Malik, R/o

Saliskote, Kargil — 194103, Age: 30 | Ph.D.

11.Dr. Khadim Hussain S/o Mohd Hassan, R/o

Mangbor, Kargil — 194103, Age: 34 | Ph.D.

12.Dr. Zulifikar Ali S/o Haji Ali Hussain, R/o

Shilikchey, Kargil — 194103, Age: 33 | Ph.D.

13.Dr. Rohullah S/o Sheikh Ghulam Abass, R/o

Hagnis, Kargil — 194103, Age: 34 | Ph.D.

14.Dr. Zakir Ali S/o Humayun Ali, R/o Khandi,

Barsoo, Kargil ~ 194103, Age: 32 | Ph.D.

15.Dr. Saleem Yousuf S/o Mohd Yousuf, R/o

Matayen, Drass, Kargil ~ 194103; Age: 34 | Ph.D.

16.Dr. Shahar Banoo D /o Mohd Hussain, R/o

Pashkum, Kargil — 194103, Age: 32 | Ph.D.

17. Dr. Mohd Ali S/o Ghulam Mohd, R/o Barsoo,

Kargil — 194103, Age: 33 | Ph.D.

18. Dr. Ahsan Ali S/o Mohd Rahim, R/o Chutumail,

Kargil - 194103, Age: 32 | Ph.D.

19. Dr. Shabbir Hussain S/o Ghulam Hassan, R/o

Tumail, Kargil - 194103, Age: 31 | Ph.D.

20. Dr. Padma Thinless S /o Lotus, R/o Shey, Leh —

194101, Age: 33 | Ph.D.

21. Dr. Azhar Hussain S/o Sheikh Mohd Javed, R/o

Thiksay, Leh — 194101, Age: 35 | Ph.D.

22. Dr. Nazia Jabeen D /o Fida Hussain, R/o

Chuchot Youkma, Leh 194101, Age: 35 | Ph.D.

23. Dr. Mohd Igbal S/o Mohd Mussa, R/o Chiktan,

Kargil - 194103, Age: 37 | Ph.D.

24. Dr. Stanzin Yangdol D/o Lamchung Tsering, R/o

Likir, Leh — 194101, Age: 36 | Ph.D.

25. Dr. Villayat Ali S/o Ghulam Mehdi, R/o Sankoo,

Kargil -194103, Age: 32 | Ph.D.

26. Jigmat Stanzin S/o Rigzen Wangchuk, R/o

Mudh, Leh ~ 194101, Age: 32 | Ph.D.

27. Dr. Bulbul Ali S/o Mohd Qasim, R/o Sangrah,

Sankoo, Kargil - 194103, Age: 30 | Ph.D.

28. Dr. Dechan Angmo, D /0 Rigzen Yangjor, R/o

Matho, Leh —- 194101, Age: 33, Ph.D.

29. Amjad Ali, S/o Abdul Hamid, R/o Chuchot

Gongma, Ladakh — 194103, Age: 32, Ph.D.

30. Padma Namgyal, S/o Tashi Rigzin, R/o Shey, Leh

- 194101, Age: 32, Ph.D.

31. Mohd Shabir, S/o Mohd Amin, R/o Kargil —

194103, Age: 36, Ph.D.

32. Feroze Hussain S/o Mohammad Hussain R/o

Chulichan, Age: 30 years, Ph.D.

33. Sabir Hussain S/o Mohammad Ibrahim R/o

Khandi Kargil, Age: 31 years, Ph. D.

……Applicants

By Advocate :

Mr. Akhail Ahmad Bardi

VERSUS

1. Union Territory of Ladakh, through Commissioner/

Secretary, School Education Department, UT Secretariat,

Leh -194101.

2. Director, School Education Department, Ladakh, ‘Leh

- 194101.

3. Union Public Service Commission through its

Chairman Dholpur House Shahjhan Road New Delhi-

110069

..….Respondents

By Advocate :-

Mr. S N Ratanpuri

Ms. Mahapara Ali

Ms. Fiza

O.A. No. 1012/2025

Date of Order: 02nd April, 2025

C O R A M

HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU TAGORE, MEMBER(JUDL.)

HON’BLE MR. PRASANT KUMAR, MEMBER(Admn.)

1. MAQSUMA BANOO AGED:373,Ph.D

D/O MOHD ALI R/O HAGNIS,CHICKTAN, KARGIL

PIN CODE: 194103

2. PHUNTSOG DOLMA AGE

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 4158

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALRitu Tagore, J, Prasant Kumar, Administrative MemberStanzin Dolkar – AppellantVersusUnion Territory of Ladakh – RespondentO.A. No. 976/2025 | OA 1012 OF 2025

Where recruitment rules contain an explicit relaxation clause, the appointing authority must objectively and reasonably consider representations for relaxation of qualifications, and failure to do so warrants judicial intervention to ensure administrative fairness.

Cases Referred (2)

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Ritu Tagore, J, Prasant Kumar, Administrative Member
Stanzin Dolkar – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory of Ladakh – Respondent
O.A. No. 976/2025 | OA 1012 OF 2025