ORDER

Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J) :

In the present Original Application, the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:

“a) Quash and set aside the impugned Final Scorecard dated 17.02.2026 of the Applicant to the extent that it erroneously changes his category to ‘General’ from EWS and re-process the Applicant’s result based on his score of 78.4 marks under the EWS Category for Jammu and Kashmir (Militancy Affected Area);

b) Direct the Respondents to accept the EWS Certificate dated 25.02.2025 as well as Certificate dated 25.11.2025 issued by the Tehsildar as valid and subsisting for the FY 2023-24;

c) Direct the Respondents to restore the Applicant’s status as an EWS candidate;

d) Set aside the impugned Result/Notification dated 15.01.2026 as well as the List of Male Candidates recommended for Appointment in Roll Number Order (LIST-ID), to the extent that it excludes the Applicant;

e) Direct the Respondents to include the name of the Applicant in the Final Merit List of selected candidates for the applicable post in the appropriate Force as per his merit and preference;

f) Direct the Respondents to issue an Appointment Letter to the Applicant with all consequential benefits, including notional seniority and back wages;

g) Direct the Respondents to keep one post vacant for the Applicant during the pendency of the present application, or in the event that all advertised vacancies are filled during the pendency of this Application, the Respondents shall create one post to accommodate the Applicant as per his merit and preference, at the time of final adjudication, to satisfy the ends of justice;

h) Award the costs of this litigation in favour of the Applicant, as he was forced into legal proceedings due to the Respondents’ arbitrary and discriminatory decision;

i) Pass any other such order(s) as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”

Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the present Original Application has been filed challenging the arbitrary exclusion of the applicant from the selection list for the post of Constable (GD) despite securing a higher normalized score of 78.4 marks, which is above the EWS cut-off for Jammu & Kashmir (Militancy Affected Area), including BSF (76.0529) and CRPF (75.79925), and despite his successful completion of all stages of recruitment including CBE, PST/PET and DME, where he was declared medically fit.

2.1. Learned counsel further submitted that the applicant, a bona fide EWS candidate from Doda, Jammu & Kashmir, was wrongly re-categorized from EWS to Unreserved at the final stage despite submission and acceptance of valid EWS certificates including the Tehsildar’s certificate dated 25.11.2025 certifying his EWS status for FY 2023–24.

2.2. It was contended that the delay and discrepancy in issuance of certificates occurred due to systemic administrative overhaul shifting to an online-only portal, beyond the applicant’s control, and therefore cannot defeat his substantive right to reservation.

2.3. Reliance is placed upon Ram Kumar Gijroya v. DSSSB & Anr. (2016) 4 SCC 754 to contend that denial of reservation benefit on hyper technical grounds of timing of certificate violates Articles 14 and 16; Pushpa v. Govt. (NCT of Delhi), 2009 SCC OnLine Del 281 to submit that a candidate cannot suffer due to administrative delay in issuance of certificates; Tej Pal Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi (1999 SCC OnLine Del 1092) to urge that socio-economic status is a substantive fact and certificate is only evidentiary; and Shubhangi Kawde v. State of Maharashtra (OA No. 387/2025, order dated 03.12.2025, MAT Nagpur Bench) to contend that EWS reservation cannot be denied on procedural technicalities. Reliance is further placed on Ms. Heena Qasim Phoplunkar v. MPSC (WP No. 1746 of 2026, Bombay High Court) to submit that an erroneous or technical defect in issuance of certificate cannot defeat substantive eligibility.

3.