Applicants who participate in an examination process without protest are estopped from challenging the selection criteria after an unsuccessful result, and such claims must be brought within a reasonable time as the law does not favor those who sleep on their rights.

O R D E R

By Smt. Mallika Arya, Member (Administrative) :-

1. In the present original application, the applicants who belong to SC/ST category being eligible candidates appeared in the departmental competitive examination held in May 1999 for the post of JTO but could not qualify as the benefit of relaxed standards was not given to them. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the respondents have reduced the standard of evaluation to 30% and 20% minimum marks for OCs and SC/ST categories vide circular dated 05.06.1997 which has been withdrawn by the DOPT vide OM dated 22.07.1997 in light of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of S. Vinod Kumar Vs. U.O.I & Ors – (1996) 6 SCC 580. Learned counsel for the applicant has also contended that the judgment of S. Vinod Kumar (Supra) has been overruled by the Constitution Bench of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rohtas Bhankhar Vs. UOI & Ors – (2014) 8 SCC 872 and the circular dated 22.07.1997 has become void. Therefore, the applicants are entitled for the benefit of relaxation in terms of circular dated 05.06.1997 for the JTO examination held in May 1999. Learned counsel for the applicants is relying on the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of M.P dated 06.08.2014 passed in Writ Petition No. 10340/2013- R.D. Choudhary & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors (Annexure A-5). He has submitted that since the respondents vide order dated 01.10.2015 (Annexure A-8) have given the benefit to the petitioners of the said Writ Petition, therefore, the applicants being similarly placed are also entitled to the similar benefit. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that denial of benefit of relaxed standard for the JTO exam held in May 1999 based on the Circular dated 22.07.1997 is not justified as the said circular has been overruled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its’ judgment passed in Rohtas Bhankhar Vs. UOI & Ors – 2014(8)SCC 872 and thereafter in the case of R.D. Choudhuri (Supra). Thus, the learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that since the circular dated 22.07.1997 has already been declared illegal therefore, denial of benefit of relaxation or reduced evaluation standard to the applicants is arbitrary, discriminatory and unjustified and prayed that relief may be granted to them.

2. The respondents have controverted the claim of the applicants and filed their reply. Referring to the contents of reply, learned counsel for the respondents has raised the issue of delay and latches in filing the present Original Application. Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the cause of action arose in the year 2003 whereas the present OA has been filed in 2015. The applicants have not filed any application explaining such an inordinate delay. Learned counsel for the respondents have also submitted that the claim of the applicants pertains to the departmental examination held in 1999. Since then the applicants have slept over their grievance and have woken up only in 2015 when the matter of one Shri R.D. Choudhary got settled who approached the court in time. Learned counsel for the respondents has also cited the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Chairman, U.P. Jal Nigam and Anr. Vs. Jaswant Singh & Anr – (2006) 11 SCC 464 and submitted that the law assists only those who are vigilant with their right.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents has further submitted that if a candidate has participated in the selection process, knowing well the criteria of examination, he cannot be allowed to challenge the same after declaration of result. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the respondents has cited judgment of Hon’b