Delhi High Court - Orders
Rajesh Kumar And Anr vs Dsssb And Ors on 16 February, 2024
Author: V. Kameswar Rao
Bench: V. Kameswar Rao
$~23
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 2056/2024
RAJESH KUMAR AND ANR. ..... Petitioners
Through: Ms. Niyati Sharma, Advocate
versus
DSSSB AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Gaurav Dhingra, Advocate for
respondent no. 1 & 3
Mr. Nikhil Palli, Advocate for
respondent no.2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE
ORDER
% 16.02.2024 CM APPL. 8577/2024 ( for exemption) Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of.
W.P.(C) 2056/2024
1. This petition challenges the order dated July 7, 2023 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in R.A. No. 104/2021 and order dated January 23, 2023 in O.A. No. 3354/2014 and O.A. No. 1918/2015.
2. At the outset, we may state here that the petitioners were the applicants in O.A. No. 3354/2014. The challenge in the O.A. was primarily to the action of the respondents in not reducing the pass percentage for examination held for selection to the post of Teacher (Primary) conducted by Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board, Government of NCT of Delhi.
3. As noted by Tribunal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/02/2024 at 20:55:17 had not pressed the challenge against the non-reduction of the minimum qualifying marks for OBC candidates from 35 % to 30%. The other ground for the Tribunal to reject the O.A. was also that the petitioners had participated in the examination process.
4. Suffice to state that the Review Petition was filed by the petitioners before the Tribunal, was also rejected by the Tribunal as no grounds seeking review of the order had been pleaded.
5. Before us also the learned counsel for the petitioners has only urged the point that the respondents have wrongly not reduced the pass percentage from 35% to 30%.
6. If this being the only ground urged before us and noting the fact that the learned counsel for the petitioners has not pressed the said challenge before the Tribunal, we are of the view, the plea is not sustainable as the petitioners despite knowing participated in the selection process, cannot challenge the non-reduction of the minimum qualifying marks.
7. We do not find any merit in the petition, the same is dismissed.
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J SAURABH BANERJEE, J FEBRUARY 16, 2024/akr This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/02/2024 at 20:55:17