$~27 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 08.04.2026 + W.P.(C) 5719/2023 GIRISH KUMAR SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ankur Chibber, Mr.

Anshuman Mehrotra, Advs.

versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Dhruv Bhagat, Adv.

Mr. Ajay Pal, Law Officer, Insp. Athurv and Mr.

Ramniwas Yadav, CRPF.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN J U D G M E N T (ORAL) ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.:

CM APPL. 22396/2026[For condonation of delay in filing the Counter-Affidavit]

1. The present application has been filed by the Respondents seeking condonation of delay of 91 days in filing the Counter-

Affidavit.

2. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the delay stands condoned. The Counter-Affidavit is taken on record.

3. The present application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 5719/2023

4. Through the present Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 06.10.2022 [hereinafter referred to as the „Impugned Order‟], whereby his candidature for the post of Constable (GD) in the Central Armed Police Forces [„CAPF‟] has been cancelled. The Petitioner further seeks consequential directions for consideration of his candidature.

5. The issue which arises for consideration in the present Petition is whether an inadvertent error in the online application form regarding the district of domicile, which neither affects the eligibility of the candidate nor confers any undue advantage, can justify the cancellation of candidature, particularly when the candidate has successfully cleared all stages of the selection process.

FACTUAL MATRIX:

6. In order to appreciate the controversy involved, it would be apposite to briefly notice the relevant facts.

7. The Petitioner is an Ex-Serviceman, who served in the Indian Army for a considerable period of time before seeking voluntary retirement. Thereafter, he applied for recruitment to the post of Constable (General Duty) in the CAPF, National Investigation Agency, Special Security Force, and Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles, pursuant to a recruitment notice issued in the year 2021.

8. It is not in dispute that the Petitioner is a permanent resident of District Morena in the State of Madhya Pradesh and holds a valid Domicile Certificate issued by the competent authority of the said district.

9. The Petitioner successfully cleared all stages of the recruitment process, including the Computer Based Examination, Physical Efficiency Test/Physical Standard Test, and the Detailed Medical Examination. However, at the stage of Document Verification, his candidature came to be cancelled vide the Impugned Order.

10. The sole reason for such cancellation is that while filling up the online application form, the Petitioner mentioned his domicile district as “Gwalior” instead of “Morena” in certain columns of the application form, though in the very same application form, he correctly mentioned his permanent address as being in District Morena. Furthermore, all documentary records, including the Domicile Certificate, reflect his residence as District Morena.

CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES:

11. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the discrepancy in the application form is a bona fide and inadvertent error, which neither affects the eligibility of the Petitioner nor confers any undue advantage upon him. It is contended that both Morena and Gwalior fall within the State of Madhya Pradesh and, therefore, the mistake is inconsequential.

12. Learned counsel further places reliance on the judgment of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) 3721/2017 captioned Arkshit Kapoor v. Union of India and Ors., wherein it has been held that cancellation of candidature on account of a typographical or inadvertent error, which does not affect the eligibility of the candidate and does not confer any undue advantage, would be arbitrary and dispropor