Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 4989

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Judicial Member, Sumeet Jerath, Administrative Member
Naresh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Municipal Corporation of Delhi through its Commissioner – Respondent
OA No.701/2019

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Kushank Sindhu, Parth Kaushal, Snigdha Verma
For the Respondents: Amit Anand, Amit Sinha, Sunil

No indefeasible right to appointment from provisional selection where vacancies reduced to nil due to restructuring; belated challenge after knowing revised vacancies barred by limitation and estoppel.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 14 - Service law - Recruitment process - Selected candidate has no indefeasible right to appointment - Provisional shortlisting does not confer right where vacancies reduced to nil post advertisement due to administrative restructuring - Challenge to vacancy reduction after inordinate delay barred - Participation in process with knowledge of revised vacancies estops challenge - Withdrawal of selection process for non-availability of vacancies not arbitrary - Actions based on departmental communications and provisional vacancy clause in advertisement upheld. (Paras 53, 54, 55, 57)

(B) Limitation - Challenge to corrigendum reducing vacancies filed after over five years delay not maintainable - Cause of action for non-appointment arises post result but delay unexplained - Estoppel applies where candidate participates knowingly in revised process. (Para 53)

(C) Legitimate expectation - Not applicable absent representation or assurance and where vacancies cease to exist prior to final selection - Doctrine cannot override administrative exigencies. (Para 58)

Facts of the case:
OBC candidate applied for posts of Draughtsman Grade-III and Grade-II under 2012 advertisement - Initially notified vacancies reduced to nil for Grade-III and two UR for Grade-II via 2013 corrigendum post MCD trifurcation - Cleared exam in 2017, provisionally shortlisted for Grade-III in 2018 but process withdrawn due to nil vacancies - Sought appointment alleging arbitrariness.

Findings of Court:
No final selection made - Vacancies lawfully revised based on abolition communications - Delay and estoppel fatal to challenge - No arbitrariness or Article 14 violation.

Issues: Whether reduction of vacancies to nil and withdrawal of process arbitrary; whether limitation bars challenge; whether provisional selection entitles appointment despite nil vacancies; validity of legitimate expectation claim.

Ratio Decidendi: Mere provisional shortlisting above cut-off confers no right to appointment where vacancies do not exist; recruitment authorities may revise provisional vacancies per requisition without arbitrariness; belated challenge after participation estopped; administrative actions on record not vitiated by non-application of mind.

Result: Original Application dismissed. No order as to costs.

Table of Content
1. applicant's arguments on arbitrariness and article 14 violation (Para 7)

6 M s ft .g RM d C . u e P 4 , i I c S Ih P R R RR S t t :n a e H f a s 7 o e R U s s h C c u N n a d na R M n M a y L aP N r y S Ci i i E m i e nd l l l ll u r i D a e o o w w w l er h N R v idl m g w , i b h t .c r l ow P t i ae rR, w T . m r t A n v D r s y y yyi a a p w R t S r t y , wn d , e ed t , h ( I l B DDlou A P J e e i N n , B L C M S w s hl r D h x p n ) r L u W t C a k A , v / Si y r id - c K l m rB i R oR . , y 5 osnt ,o k n PO a . o ata r n D P d gHo n g h k ha u i i V A y v i h l a M l o a L o yi r ,wr E na l B . w d u ss Hb N ) M d I O d B g R ll P p N h , s , ( L o o ORDER Hon’ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J):

The applicant has approached this Tribunal by way of the present Original Application being aggrieved by the arbitrary, mala fide and unlawful actions of the respondents in not permitting the applicant to join the post of Draughtsman Grade-III (Civil), despite having fulfilled all the eligibility conditions and having been duly selected in the recruitment process. It is submitted that although the applicant does not claim any indefeasible right to appointment, the process adopted by the respondents is vitiated by arbitrariness and is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

2. The applicant belongs to the Darji caste, categorized as an Other Backward Class by the Government of NCT of Delhi, and does not fall within the creamy layer. He is financially weak and has, through hard work, qualified the examination conducted by the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB). The recruitment process commenced with Advertisement No. 02/2012 dated 15.05.2012 issued by DSSSB for various posts including Draughtsman Grade-III (Post Code 07/12) and Draughtsman Grade-II (Post Code 08/12) in the erstwhile Municipal Corporation of Delhi. The advertisement clearly provided that selection would be based on written examination and also stipulated limited grounds for cancellation of candidature.

3. The applicant applied for the said posts and appeared in the examination conducted in 2017. He secured 70.75 marks, which was above the prescribed qualifying marks for the OBC category, and was declared selected vide notice dated 16.04.2018. He also complied with all procedural requirements including submission of his e-dossier.

G L O A (S Morm. S nP 1234567 HBLCARB(B ta ....... g/ae h o y d blos n UTMNGNRTDNDNMWSIMNLKN wd Be . t At u h h ’ u 1 a u eoao oo neRR r aa n b o d nwr r c i r r r n w p 5 b l i n hh MMr l t l u b v ot t tt o b k e w 8 k h h e s o t u u D Rp h D H S K r / isb v O(e ee c MD n d a u g gP o i , e 1 r o i y a v h h yl t gr f r c Y w.s ) l s n L

4. However, the respondents, in a series of arbitrary actions, first reduced the number of vacancies to zero through a corrigendum dated 09.04.2013, then conducted the examination years later, declared results, and subsequently withdrew the entire selection process vide notice dated 13.07.2018 on the ground that no vacancies existed post trifurcation of the MCD. This action was allegedly based on a communication dated 30.08.2012 from SDMC, which was never disclosed in a timely manner and surfaced only through RTI.

5. Counsel for the applicant contends that the order dated 18.04.2012 regarding trifurcation did not abolish the posts of Draughtsman Grade-III in the Engineering

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 4989

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALHarvinder Kaur Oberoi, Judicial Member, Sumeet Jerath, Administrative MemberNaresh Kumar – AppellantVersusMunicipal Corporation of Delhi through its Commissioner – RespondentOA No.701/2019

No indefeasible right to appointment from provisional selection where vacancies reduced to nil due to restructuring; belated challenge after knowing revised vacancies barred by limitation and estoppel.

Cases Referred (3)

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Judicial Member, Sumeet Jerath, Administrative Member
Naresh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Municipal Corporation of Delhi through its Commissioner – Respondent
OA No.701/2019