$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 18.03.2024 + W.P.(C) 2831/2021 & CM APPL. 8519/2021 -Int. relief.

MONIKA ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Advocate (appearance not given)

versus DSSSB & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh, Advocate for Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel for GNCTD with CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR REKHA PALLI, J (ORAL)

1. The present writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeks to assail the order dated 05.03.2020 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A.3572/2017. Vide the impugned order, the learned Tribunal has dismissed the original application filed by the petitioner, wherein she had sought inclusion of her name in the selected list of candidates for appointment to the post of TGT (Computer Science) under the ‘Physically Handicapped’ Category (PH category).

2. Before dealing with the rival submissions of the parties, we may note the brief factual matrix as emerging from the record.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 2831/2021 Page 1 of 7

3. Upon an advertisement being issued by the respondents in January 2014 inviting applications for appointment to the post of TGT (Computer Science), the petitioner who belonged to the PH category applied for selection to the said post under the unreserved category. The petitioner duly appeared in the computer based examination for the said post on 21.05.2017 and while filling her OMR sheet, she stated that she belonged to the PH category. Within ten days thereafter, the petitioner, on 02.06.2017, upon realising that her candidature was likely to be considered as unreserved category candidate, approached the respondent to seek correction of her category. As she had, while filling the OMR sheet stated that she belonged to the PH category, she was shortlisted under the PH category and accordingly, uploaded her requisite documents, including the medical certificates, for verification under the said category. Upon declaration of results, even though the petitioner scored 76.25% marks, her name was not included in the list of candidates selected under the PH category on the premise that she had submitted her application form under the unreserved category.

4. Being aggrieved, the petitioner made repeated representations to the respondents to consider her candidature under the PH category. However, upon receiving no response thereto, she was compelled to approach the learned Tribunal by way of the aforesaid original application. While issuing notice in the O.A, the learned Tribunal passed an interim order directing the respondent to keep one seat Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 2831/2021 Page 2 of 7 vacant for the petitioner under the PH category. However, after completion of pleadings, the learned Tribunal has rejected the original application filed by the petitioner. It is in these circumstances that the petitioner has approached this Court by way of the present petition.

5. In support of the petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is wholly perverse as the learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate that that it was undisputed that the petitioner belongs to the PH category and had inadvertently filled her application form under the unreserved category, which mistake she sought correction of within 10 days of her appearing in the examination. She submits that when the factum of her being physically handicapped was easily verifiable from the medical documents, which had been duly uploaded and therefore, there was no reason for the respondent to reject her candidature under the PH category. In support of her plea that change of category can be permitted even at a later stage, she seeks to place reliance on a decision of the Coordinate Bench dated 08.03.2019 passed in W.P.(C) 10007/2018 titled as Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Yadav. She, therefore, prays that the