Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 6584

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Rajinder Singh Dogra, J, Ram Mohan Johri, Administrative Member
Arun Sagar – Appellant
Versus
State of Jammu and Kashmir – Respondent
T.A No. 611/2020

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Surinder Kour
For the Respondents: Rajesh Thapa, Hunar Gupta

A candidate who participates in a selection process without protest and takes a chance at selection is barred by the principles of acquiescence and estoppel from challenging the process after being unsuccessful, unless they can establish patent illegality or fraud.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 16 - Recruitment process - Challenge to selection list by unsuccessful candidates - Applicants participated in all stages of selection without protest - Held, unsuccessful candidates who participated in the selection process without protest are estopped from challenging the process after the results are declared - Allegations of favouritism and breach of procedure must be supported by cogent and specific evidence - Mere suspicion or vague allegations cannot invalidate a selection process that occurred over 15 years prior. (Paras 15, 16, 19)

(B) Administrative Law - Judicial Review - Reluctance to unsettle long-standing selections - Courts and tribunals should be slow to disturb old selections unless there is clear proof of fraud, patent illegality, or violation of mandatory statutory rules, particularly when the selected candidates have served for a long duration. (Paras 19, 23)

Facts of the case:
The applicants sought to quash the select list for the post of Sub-Inspectors in the Executive Wing of J&K Police pursuant to an advertisement issued in 2009. They alleged that the private respondents were wrongly selected despite not qualifying physical tests, and that the examination pattern was arbitrary. The respondents contended that the applicants participated in the entire process, including written tests and viva-voce, without protest, and failed only because they did not secure marks within the merit zone.

Findings of Court:
The Tribunal found that the applicants failed to produce any evidence to substantiate their claims of favoritism or that unqualified candidates were selected. The challenge was deemed to be a post-result grievance from unsuccessful candidates, which is barred by acquiescence and estoppel.

Issues: Whether the selection process for Sub-Inspectors was arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16, and whether the applicants are entitled to challenge the selection after participating in the process and failing to be selected.

Ratio Decidendi: A candidate who participates in the selection process without protest cannot, after being unsuccessful, turn around and challenge the validity of the process. The tribunal affirmed that selections cannot be set aside based on vague allegations, especially after a significant lapse of time.

Result: Transfer Application dismissed.

Table of Content
1. summary of facts, arguments, and procedural background regarding the recruitment dispute. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
2. doctrine of acquiescence and estoppel against unsuccessful candidates challenging selection processes. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
3. reluctance of the court to disturb old selections without evidence of patent illegality. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)

ORDER

Per: - Ram Mohan Johri, Administrative Member

1. The SWP/WPC/07/2011 was transferred from the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir at Jammu and was registered as T.A No.611/2020 by the Registry of this Tribunal.

2. The present matter was filed before the Hon’ble High Court seeking following relief: -

a) to quash select list issued by the respondents for the post of Sub-Inspectors in Executive Wing of J&K Police by which the respondents have selected private respondent nos. 5 to 12 as Sub-Inspectors in Executive Wing pursuant to Advertisement Notice no. PERS-A-400-2009/4414-513 dated 29.01.2009 and ignored the petitioners, who are fully eligible and entitled for the same, by issuance of writ of certiorari.

b) to issue directions to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for selection/appointment to the post of Sub-Inspectors in Executive Wing of J&K Police under open merit category as the petitioners are fully eligible and entitled for being selected/appointed to the post of Sub-Inspectors as the petitioners are more meritorious than private respondent nos. 5 to 12, by issuance of writ of mandamus;

c) to issue directions to the respondents restraining them to implement select list issued by the respondents for the post of Sub-Inspectors in Executive Wing of J&K Police by which the respondents have selected private respondent nos. 5 to 12 as Sub-Inspectors in Executive Wing pursuant to Advertisement Notice no. PERS-A-400-2009/4414-513 dated 29.01.2009 and ignored the petitioners, who are fully eligible and entitled for the same and also restraining the respondents to allow any candidates to join on the post of Sub-Inspectors under open merit category and also restraining them to issue appointment orders in favour of selected candidates /private respondent nos. 5 to 12 under open merit category and restraining the respondents to make any appointment/adjustment for the Sub Inspectors in J&K Executive Police under open merit category, by issuance of writ of prohibition;

d) to issue directions to the respondents to produce the original record of selection before this Hon'ble Court by which the respondents have selected private respondent nos. 5 to 12 as Sub-Inspectors in J&K Executive Police under open merit category, by issuance of writ of mandamus;

e) to declare select list issued by the respondents for the post of Sub-Inspectors in Executive Wing of J&K Police by which the respondents have selected private respondent nos. 5 to 12 as Sub-Inspectors in Executive Wing pursuant to Advertisement Notice no. PERS-A-400-2009/4414-513 dated 29.01.2009 and ignored the petitioners, who are fully eligible and entitled for the same, as ultra virus, illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, unjust and contrary to the provisions of law and Rules and against the provisions of principles of natural justice, by issuance of writ of mandamus;

f) to issue any other writ, order or directions which the Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents with costs.”

3. The present Transfer Application arises out of SWP/WPC No. 07/2011, which was transferred from the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir at Jammu to this Tribunal and registered as T.A. No. 611/2020.

4. The applicants have filed the present proceedings seeking quashing of the select list issued by the respondents for the post of Sub-Inspectors in the Executive Wing of J&K Police pursuant to Advertisement Notice No. PERS-A-400-2009/4414-513 dated 29.01.2009

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 6584

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALRajinder Singh Dogra, J, Ram Mohan Johri, Administrative MemberArun Sagar – AppellantVersusState of Jammu and Kashmir – RespondentT.A No. 611/2020

A candidate who participates in a selection process without protest and takes a chance at selection is barred by the principles of acquiescence and estoppel from challenging the process after being unsuccessful, unless they can establish patent illegality or fraud.

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Rajinder Singh Dogra, J, Ram Mohan Johri, Administrative Member
Arun Sagar – Appellant
Versus
State of Jammu and Kashmir – Respondent
T.A No. 611/2020